MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220989157 · doi:10.25071/1913-9632.39633

Playing for Power: The European Worker Sport Movement and the Seeds of the American Labour Sports Movement, 1919-1940

2022· article· en· W4220989157 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J. E. M. Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueLeft History An Interdisciplinary Journal of Historical Inquiry and Debate · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovement (music)Context (archaeology)Political sciencePower (physics)Political economySociologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the late 1930s until the early 1950s, a large Labor Sports movement existed in the United States, especially in unions under the leadership of Socialists or Communists. I argue that it is impossible to understand the Labor Sports movement outside of this wider global context, because Labor Sports in the United States were directly linked to Worker Sport via both individuals and organizations. Indeed, Americans with knowledge of Worker Sport sought to establish similar institutions in the United States, even though the results were ultimately quite different. Labor Sports was inspired by Worker Sport, and so to understand the American Labor Sports, I will start with the European Worker Sport. American left-wing sports organizing prior to the rise of the CIO largely sought to create the American wing of Worker Sport, albeit with limited success.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.014
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeft History An Interdisciplinary Journal of Historical Inquiry and DebateSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207