Bibliographic record
Abstract
This manuscript was discovered among Harold Innis’s unpublished writings in his papers at the University of Toronto Archives (B72-0025/025). It bears the title and description given above, and is six and one-half single-spaced pages in length in a 10-point font. The manuscript is not accompanied by any material explaining its context and origins. However, a number of letters referring to it were located within Innis’s correspondence (B72-0025/002 and B72-0025/003). (Details on these letters are provided in an article by Buxton and Dickens in this issue of CJC.) Aside from the adjustment of the pagination (the original page breaks have been indicated with consecutive numbers in square brackets) and the justification of the text, the only major change made to the typescript of the address has been the addition of endnotes (there are no references listed in the original transcript). These not only indicate (as far as possible) the sources that Innis used for his quotes, but provide information about persons, journals, organizations, events, and various other phenomena referred to by Innis, many of which would not be familiar to the contemporary reader.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".