MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1556806465

Forestry Workers and their Communities

2008· article· en· W1556806465 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
William G. Robbins

Bibliographic record

VenueLabour / Le Travail · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsParallelsMillWork (physics)BluffEconomic historySociologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomyArchaeologyHistoryLawEngineeringEconomicsOperations management
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Until the development of the chainsaw and the intensive mechanization of the lumber industry during World War II, rank-and-file workers dominated the labour force in the woods and mills of the North Pacific slope and the American South. Those workers produced good profits for the owners of capital and were able in many instances to extract a modest living for themselves. From the histories that have been written about the turbulent life in many timber communities, it is clear that workers were not passive in the face of arbitrary decisions made by logging and sawmill bosses. Those who worked in the woods and mills of British Columbia, the American Northwest, and the great pineries of the American South struggled – often against great odds and under demanding circumstances – to gain a fair share of the wealth they produced. While mill owners, resident managers, and their allies in the business community usually controlled local politics, I argued in Hard Times in Paradise: Coos Bay, Oregon (2006) that their working-class constituents frequently tempered decisions and helped forge a political culture that embraced some of the hopes and aspirations of common people. Although the industries and work life covered in these three books span different corners of the North American continent and different moments in time, there are interesting parallels between industrial life in the towns and woods of these disparate regions. From British Columbia’s lumber towns to REVIEW ESSAY / NOTE CRITIQUE

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLabour / Le TravailSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207