MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2174592610

How the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Served the Military in Korea, 1951-1956

2015· article· en· W2174592610 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mallory Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Culture and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporationBroadcasting (networking)TelecommunicationsBusinessAeronauticsComputer securityAdvertisingComputer scienceEngineeringFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (cbc) offered vital support to the Canadian forces engaged in the Korean theatre during and after the war, waged from 1950 to 1953.Though motivations varied between bureaucrats, service personnel, and broadcasters, all considered radio a means of evoking a sense of home on foreign soil or seas.To that end, the cbc went beyond reporting on the conflict to supply the armed forces with hundreds of hours of radio content, all carefully chosen to meet popular tastes, religious needs, and language requirements.Material passed from the cbc to the Far East by means of teletype circuits, shortwave transmitters and airmail parcels, filled with tapes and discs.This was only possible through collaboration with news agencies, Commonwealth broadcasters, and radio stations that served allied troops.This article traces the changing rationale, resources, and relationships on which the cbc relied as it helped to build a radio service for the armed forces, starting with the earliest efforts in 1951, shortly after the first Canadians arrived, and continuing until 1956, when few still remained in Korea.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0230.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University)Same topicAsian Culture and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207