MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224316086 · doi:10.1080/19376529.2022.2056605

From “Cafeteria Stereo System” to the Airwaves: The Evolution of Cape Breton University’s<i>Caper Radio</i>

2022· article· en· W4224316086 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Felix Odartey‐Wellington, Bryce McNeil, Joel Inglis, Joe Costello

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Radio & Audio Media · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBroadcasting (networking)Radio broadcastingContext (archaeology)Media studiesCommercial broadcastingPolitical scienceSociologyTelecommunicationsHistoryEngineeringComputer scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper illustrates that campus radio continues to be relevant within the Canadian media ecosystem. Because of the unique commitments of campus-community radio, this sector constitutes an important part of the Canadian broadcasting ecosystem. In July 2019, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission licensed Caper Radio as a campus broadcaster located in Nova Scotia’s Cape Breton University. This marked a milestone in the evolution of a broadcaster that started as a cafeteria stereo system in the 90s and which enjoys cultural significance within the local creative arts milieu. Within the context of Canadian broadcasting policy and regulation, this article draws on archival data and semi-structured interviews to account for Caper Radio’s evolution. It argues that Caper Radio has historically existed on the margins not just of the broadcast spectrum but also within its host university. However, as its recent licensing and shift towards more engagement by institutional stakeholders show, Caper Radio continues to be relevant as a campus broadcaster. The history of Caper Radio contributes to the literature on campus broadcasting in Canada.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Radio & Audio MediaSame topicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital MediaFrench-language works237,207