Stamping Our History: The Story of Canadian Business as Portrayed by Postage Stamps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper reviews Canadian postage stamps issued for the past 100 years to identify business‐related subjects and to ascertain how business history has been reflected. For the first half of the period studied, staples produced from agriculture and natural resources dominated stamp issues. During the second half of the period, stamp issues reflected more diversified Canadian business activity. The paper also describes the business implications of philately and presents observations regarding past and future business‐related stamp issues. Résumé On examine les timbres‐poste canadiens émis depuis une centaine d'années pour identifier les sujets reliés aux activités commerciales et pour voir comment l'histoire de ces activités a été représentée. En ce qui concerne la première moitié de la période étudiée, ce sont surtout les produits agricoles de première nécessité et les ressources naturelles qui étaient représentés sur les timbres. Quant à la deuxième moitié de la période, on représentait plutǒt sur les timbres des activités commerciales canadiennes diverses. On décrit aussi les implications de la philatélie sur les affaires et on présente des observations en ce qui concerne les émissions passées et futures de timbres‐poste reliés aux affaires.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".