MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088158214 · doi:10.14430/arctic603

Crystal Two: The Origin of Iqaluit

2003· article· en· W2088158214 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Robert V. Eno

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticThe arcticPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)EngineeringAeronauticsGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Iqaluit is unique among Canadian Arctic communities in that it originated not from a commercial venture, such as mining or the fur trade, or as a government administrative centre, but as a Second World War military airfield. This airfield, though never fully used for its intended purpose as a refueling base for short-range military aircraft en route from America to Great Britain, is the cornerstone of the city of Iqaluit. It opened the region to development during the postwar years. As a result, Iqaluit became a key transportation and communication hub for the eastern Arctic and, ultimately, the capital city of the new territory of Nunavut. This survey of Iqaluit's wartime origins and subsequent development focuses on four topics. The first is the pre-war and wartime effort to establish an air route from North America to Europe via the Arctic; the second, the world events that precipitated construction of a series of northern airfields, including Crystal Two, that would form the links in the Crimson Air Route. The third is the importance of the Crystal Two airfield for the postwar development of Iqaluit, and the final focus is on the resourceful individuals who pulled it all together, overcoming a myriad of apparently insurmountable obstacles to complete their mission.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207