Skating on thin ice? An interrogation of Canada’s melting pastime
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Outdoor hockey is considered a quintessentially “Canadian” leisure pursuit, and is enjoyed on rinks constructed in local parks within urban centres as well as on frozen ponds in rural regions of the country. Such experiences are being threatened, however, due to increasingly warming winter months and shortened skating seasons caused by climate change. This paper explores the meaning behind the loss of outdoor hockey for Canadians by outlining socio-historical narratives that posit hockey as a symbol of childhood memory, nationhood, and romanticized fantasy. Such fantasies are unsettled, however, when juxtaposed with the current realities of the game, which, rather than taking place in its “natural” state, occurs primarily indoors. The migration of hockey into climate-controlled facilities is symbolic of a Canadian physical activity culture that disproportionately favours organized, competitive sport. This privileging of organized sport has not been met, however, with increased physical activity amongst the majority of Canadian youth, especially amongst low socio-economic communities. Such inequities when it comes to sport and play are exacerbated within the hockey realm, where class, racialized, and gender distinctions are more pronounced than within other athletic endeavours. In response, we posit a construction of outdoor hockey not as a romanticized fantasy of the past, but as a potential social space conducive to unstructured play, community revitalization, and inclusivity that transcends these barriers to the current state of hockey. Under current climate change projections, the potential for such spaces continues to slowly melt away.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.049 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".