MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Electromagnetic Geography and the Unreliable Nation

2017· book-chapter· en· W4250902600 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe MIT Press eBooks · 2017
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPolar Research and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShortwaveIndigenousCorporationGeographyBroadcasting (networking)Government (linguistics)Political scienceState (computer science)Natural (archaeology)Computer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter examines the rise and fall of the “radio geographies” of the North and, with them, of the relationship between Northern nature and shortwave radio disruptions in Canada. It focuses on maps created around the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC)’s shortwave transmissions and their place in the large-scale state initiatives of the 1950s and 1960s. These geographies defined the failure of radio broadcasts according to a specific human geography of the North, a spatial distribution of radio transmitters, and a natural order of high-northern latitudes. That fallibility, in turn, was used to define the North as a region. Government officials envisioned shortwave radio as a medium naturally suited to the customs and culture of indigenous people. In the late 1960s, satellite communications, which promised to overcome radio disruptions, were seen as a threat not only to indigenous culture but to the definition of the region itself.

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)0.000
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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe MIT Press eBooksSame topicPolar Research and EcologyFrench-language works237,207