MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097515863 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2013v38n3a2736

Earth Observation and Signal Territories: Studying U.S. Broadcast Infrastructure through Historical Network Maps, Google Earth, and Fieldwork

2013· article· en· W2097515863 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lisa Parks

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterialismPhenomenology (philosophy)Earth system scienceRepresentation (politics)Earth observationEarth (classical element)GeographyMedia studiesSociologyGeologyEngineeringOceanographyEpistemologyPolitical scienceAstronomyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article engages with three different modes of Earth observation—historical network maps, Google Earth interfaces, and fieldwork—to develop the concept of “signal territories” and elucidate a critical approach for studying U.S. broadcast infrastructure. This approach: 1) highlights physical infrastructures—technological hardware and processes in dispersed geographic locations—as important sites for historical and critical analysis in media and communication studies; 2) explores multiple modes of infrastructure representation—ranging from cartography to phenomenology, from hand-drawn maps to digital interfaces, from circuit diagrams to site visits; and 3) foregrounds the biotechnical aspects and resource requirements of broadcast infrastructures, probing their dynamic operations and complex materialisms. Engaging with what Richard Maxwell and Toby Miller call a “materialist ecology” of media, the article explores what is at stake in understanding media infrastructures from up close and afar.

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)0.007
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 score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.010
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations58
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CommunicationSame topicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital MediaFrench-language works237,207