Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contact Press was an independent Canadian small press founded by Louis Dudek (1918–2001), Irving Layton (1912–2006), and Raymond Souster (1921–2012) that operated from 1952 to 1967. Cerberus (1952), Contact Press’s debut title, included poems and a preface from the three founding editors, establishing an editorial position defined by the will to control the means of publication, to support experimental modernist work, and to oppose dominant post-WWII forces of capitalist industry and commerce in the content and production of their books. As Layton explained in his preface, ‘What brings us together […] is the belief that to write poetry is to say a loud nix to the forces high-pressuring us into conformity or atomic dispersion’ (Dudek and Gnarowski 1967, 145). The name ‘Contact’ was derived from Souster’s little magazine Contact (1952–1954), which derived its name from American magazine Contact, edited by William Carlos Williams and Robert McAlmon (1920–1923, 1932). The name was also used for Souster’s Toronto-based Contact Poetry Reading Series (1957–1962). Contact Press published significant books by many of Canada’s important modernist poets and established a viable precedent for Canadian small presses that has persisted in its influence into the twenty-first century.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.723 | 0.583 |
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".