Tools for Rational Development: The Canada Land Inventory and the Canada Geographic Information System in Mid-twentieth century Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From the 1960s through the 1980s, Canadian scientists, resource managers, and computer experts collaborated on two linked undertakings: the Canada Land Inventory (CLI) and the Canada Geographic Information System. CLI was an extensive project that assessed the state of key resources across much of the country, while CGIS was a pioneering effort at computerizing CLI data to support decision-making about resource use. Fundamental components of the Agricultural Rehabilitation and Development Act, CLI and CGIS reflect Canadian innovation in new information-management tools designed to facilitate state goals. This paper examines the production and affordances of CLI and CGIS, and considers the renewed optimism and collaborative relationships that emerged from them. It also examines historical concerns over the limitations of these technologies and explores how CLI and CGIS were oriented to change over space, not time. Ultimately, these technological innovations served to naturalize patterns of inequality and normalize urban-industrial modernity.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it