Bibliographic record
Abstract
Led by the Meteorological Service of Canada, atmospheric research in Canada underwent a period of rapid growth after the end of the Second World War. Within this federal organization, and in response to operational challenges and staff shortages, there were significant investments in basic research and in research oriented toward external users within Canada. Specifically, new policies and programs were put in place to enable the organization to gain legitimacy within the scientific community and within the federal government. New links with stakeholders and, more importantly, the development of explicit policies to guide research were a prime focus. These formalized strategies for pursuing two parallel types of research generated some internal conflict, but also helped form a common scientific identity among personnel. There were concerted efforts to disseminate research products and reinforce links both with the scientific community and with external users of meteorological and climatological research. Borne out by quantitative data, this science policy–centered history sheds light on the development of research and research specializations in the field in Canada. Most importantly, it provides insight into the global postwar expansion of the atmospheric sciences, which is strongly tied to national contexts. Indeed, the quest for legitimacy and the close connection to government priorities is central to the history of the atmospheric sciences in the twentieth century. More broadly, this case study points to a possible new conception of government science driven by political, bureaucratic, and scientific imperatives, as a means to shed light on scientific networks and practices.
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 | 0.017 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.026 | 0.024 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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".