Review of Mining Country: A People’s History of Canada’s Mines and Miners (by John Sandlos & Arn Keeling)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
John Sandlos and Arn Keeling's image-soaked work on mining and miners inCanada is presented as a people's history. is matters because the authors work to weave voices and histories into their book that have often been excluded from the written account of who the miners of Canada are.Indigenous Peoples are rooted in the text from the beginning to the end, both as innovators and practitioners of mining as well as victims of its problematic role in Canadian colonialism.Sandlos and Keeling show that the history of mining is not just a story of technological triumphalism, while also demonstrating its essential and undeniable role in the function of our modern material lives.Sandlos and Keeling quote Lewis Mumford at the beginning of their book, providing a critical subtext to a work that cannot delve too deeply into the implications of the history it depicts due to the enormous geographical and historical scope of the topic.is book is essentially an introductory text or primer that is useful to high school and undergraduate students, researchers, and non-academic readers alike.However, by evoking Northrop Frye and Lewis Mumford, the authors also signal that their book is rooted in a broader theoretical understanding of mining history, connecting their work to academic debate and axiological discourse.Mumford notably devoted a critically important section of his book Technics and Civilization to the role of mining in the development of "the machine" and the deleterious dehumanizing impacts of the mining industry on human civilization.He argued that the development of the early-modern mine formed a "concrete model of the conceptual world." 1
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.027 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".