MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4249053751 · doi:10.4324/9781315206066-3

National Media Coverage and the Creation of a Canadian ‘Hockey World’: The Winnipeg-Montreal Stanley Cup Hockey Challenges, 1899–1903

2017· book-chapter· en· W4249053751 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceMedia studiesAdvertisingSociologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay examines media coverage of five Stanley Cup hockey championship series played between hockey clubs based in Winnipeg and Montreal from 1899 to 1903. Coverage of the Winnipeg–Montreal challenges contributed significantly to the growth of a Canadian ‘hockey world’ – and a broader ‘world of sport’ – during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. First, press reports and telegraph re-enactments linked fans in Winnipeg and Montreal together. At the same time, newspapers in other Canadian centres provided coverage of Stanley Cup matches. As the media constructed a shared sports information system throughout Canada, people were drawn into a wide-ranging community of interest centred on sport. Telegraph bulletins, in particular, gave fans a strong sense of participation in games that were being played in other places. By 1903, Stanley Cup hockey challenges had become ‘national’ Canadian events, followed by audiences across the country through news stories and ‘live’ telegraph reconstructions.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0120.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same topicSport and Mega-Event Impacts→French-language works237,207→