MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806646294 · doi:10.24043/isj.375

Lighthouses, pilotage and technology: the impact on small island societies

2016· article· en· W2806646294 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Per Lind

Bibliographic record

VenueIsland Studies Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIsland Studies and Pacific Affairs
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPilotageState (computer science)Scale (ratio)RevenueInvestment (military)EngineeringBusinessPolitical scienceGeographyLawComputer scienceCartographyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses how lighthouses and pilot services have been bearers of technology intended to improve the safety and reliability of maritime shipping. The introduction of technology has had a considerable impact on many small island societies through state involvement meant to reduce hazards in navigation and shipping. The impact has, however, been manifold and varied, and including positive and less positive impacts. Indeed, small islands and islanders have generally never been the beneficiaries of large scale, state-driven technology programs seeking to modernize society. As an exception, however, certain small islands have traditionally been of interest to the state due to their locations, either for defence purposes or to assist seafarers’ navigation in hazardous waters. This paper reviews the thrust and effects of investment in lighthouses and pilotage services on small islands. It concludes with a brief case story from a small populated island in Sweden that has undergone several periods of development and stagnation as a result of technology and state involvement.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIsland Studies JournalSame topicIsland Studies and Pacific AffairsFrench-language works237,207