MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202811011 · doi:10.1080/10331867.2021.1945732

Under the Radome: The Architecture of American Cold War Surveillance

2021· article· en· W3202811011 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stuart W. Leslie

Bibliographic record

VenueFabrications · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace exploration and regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadomeArchitectureCold warGeneral partnershipPoliticsEngineeringMeteorologyHistoryGeographyComputer securityPolitical scienceTelecommunicationsLawComputer scienceAntenna (radio)Archaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radomes, the iconic structures protecting sensitive radar antennas from wind, weather, and the prying eyes of adversaries, marked and maintained the geographic boundaries of America’s Cold War. The radome’s unique architecture, most commonly a rigid geodesic dome, captured the essential tensions of the Cold War, instantly recognisable but inaccessible; transparent (to radio waves) but opaque (to the naked eye); highly classified but often hidden in plain sight. Along the Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line inside the Arctic Circle in Canada and in the arid desert of the Australian outback, radomes became the telltale signs of US surveillance and spy bases; a network constructed in partnership with American allies but politically fraught for their host countries, which had little political or technical control over them. Those bases, and the communities that grew up around them, have endured, but their new missions have raised troubling new questions of national sovereignty, dependency, and privacy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.015
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFabricationsSame topicSpace exploration and regulationFrench-language works237,207