Comparison of 1914 Film Listings in Newspapers in Three Cities: Vancouver, Seattle, Winnipeg
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This SSHRC funded project (Council Grant number 430-2011-006) set out as its goal to advance our knowledge of the character of film exhibition in the early part of the 20th century in Vancouver, with a specific focus on 1914 as a case study. Dr. Peter Lester researched the majority of the theatre data. Graduate Students Babak Tabbarraee, Shaun Inouye, Nathen Clerici, Joshua Ferguson, and Dr. Christine Evans, and Dr. Diane Burgess have contributed to these data and contextual matters. The following dataset is the second of three surrounding 1914 exhibition history in Vancouver. The first dataset in the "Screens in Vancouver: Cinemagoing and the City in 1914" collection in cIRcle is a record of film listings for Vancouver by cinema and newspaper for each month of 1914. The first dataset was then compared with the main newspapers in Seattle and Winnipeg to see what overlap in films there was, and whether empirically proven statements could be made about the distribution of films in 1914. The main conclusion is that very few films overlapped, and thus the cinematic experience in 1914 was largely unique to each city. The following dataset is a record of the comparison across Vancouver, Seattle and Winnipeg. A legend for abbreviated cinema names in the three cities is also included. A third and final dataset to be released in 2014 compares film listings in Toronto and Montreal.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".