“Life is Information”: Canadian Communication and the Legacy of Graham Spry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In scholarly communication Canada has for years been blessed with contributions of the highest order: the works of Harold Innis, Marshall McLuhan, George Grant, Dallas Smythe, and Northrop Frye particularly spring to mind. The Canadian Clubs were then experimenting with radio through the broadcast of luncheon speeches, "impressed, from a publicity and educational point of view, with the advantages of reaching a much larger audience than could fill a hotel lunch room. In 1930, with Alan Plaunt, Graham Spry formed, and until 1936 worked vigorously on behalf of, the Canadian Radio League, a voluntarist association dedicated to the establishment of public broadcasting in accordance with recommendations of the 1929 Aird Royal Commission. In the 1930&s;s the medium of communication of most concern to Graham Spry was relatively inexpensive radio broadcasting, which diffused indiscriminately programming to all within the coverage area of a transmitter.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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".