Wood, Canvas, Fiberglass, and Whitewater: The Development of Recreational Paddling in Alberta, 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
In Alberta, Canada during the 1960s and early 1970s the popularity of recreational paddling expanded considerably. The reasons for this were varied, including wider demographic and economic shifts that produced a population that was both able, with time and the means, and eager to engage in these activities. But at the same time there was a notable change in the material reality of the sport brought on by the development of new construction techniques and materials. The goal of this article is to investigate the changing nature of recreational paddling in the 1960s and 70s with a focus on the influence that changing materials and construction methods had on these processes. Developed for other commercial purposes, fiberglass provided paddlers in Alberta with a means of constructing more robust canoes cheaply, quickly, and with a great deal of customization. To facilitate this construction, paddlers came together to share knowledge, materials, designs, and labor. In turn, these boatbuilding workshops became the nucleus of a budding and ultimately vibrant paddling community in the province. Moreover, the increased durability and design adaptability allowed paddlers to push the limits of the sport and successively redesign and further specialize the boats allowing for even greater skill development.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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