Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article focuses on the consequences of Canada being largely unprepared for the Second World War.Though the Canadian army did not face large scale combat until 1943 and had plenty of time to recover from pre-war neglect, the consequences of unpreparedness for the army were especially evident at Dieppe and Hong Kong.M eantim e, the Royal Canadian Navy remained a training navy until 1943 and the Royal Canadian A ir Force (rcaf) was diverted from what it might have expected when the war broke out by the B ritish Commonwealth A ir Training Plan.However, the article argues the rcaf could do little in the Battle of Britain, while "Canadianization" of the rcaf was much delayed.I n 1939 t h e entire regular force of the Canadian army was so small it could fit into Toronto's then hockey shrine, Maple Leaf Gardens, three times over.There were only 4,261 members of the Permanent Force (p f ).1 The puny size of the regular force is just one measure of the state of the Canadian military at the start of the Second World War.Virtually all of the army's equipment dated back to 1918 or in the case of a soldier's webbing, 1908.The only large scale manoeuvres the p f held between the two world wars was in 1938 and 1 " Strength Return Permanent Force -Month of July 1939" in C.P. Stacey, Six Years of War, vol.1 (Ottawa : Ministry of National Defence, 1955), 34.The same book includes a good summary of the manpower and equipment situation in chapter 1 "The Canadian Militia on the Eve of War," 3-35.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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.
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".