MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384662105 · doi:10.25071/2561-5467.1045

It Was Supposed to Be Blue: Roads Not Taken with the Canadian Armed Forces Naval Jack, 1967-68

2023· article· en· W4384662105 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Brian Bertosa

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Northern Mariner / Le marin du nord · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary History and Strategy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Armed ForcesGovernment of Canada
KeywordsRepriseContext (archaeology)HumanitiesMemoirArt historyArtPolitical scienceSociologyHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Armed Forces Naval Jack, which is today the Canadian Naval Ensign, went through a far more complicatedgestation in 1967 than has heretofore been recognized. Using the minutes of two meetings of the Defence Council conducted in the middle of 1967 and other contemporary documents, this commentary examines the process by which today’s design was created, discarded, and taken up again. These discussions also provide essential context to an otherwise puzzling passage in the memoirs of the chief of the defence staff at the time, General Jean V. Allard. Le Pavillon de marine des Forces armées canadiennes, renommé le Pavillon naval canadien, a connu un développement beaucoup plus compliqué en 1967 que ce qu’on avait reconnu jusqu’ici. À l’aide des procès-verbaux de deux réunions du Conseil de la défense tenues au milieu de 1967 et d’autres documents contemporains, cet commentaire examine le processus selon lequel la conception que nous connaissons aujourd’hui a été créée, abandonnée puis reprise. Ces propos fournissent également un contexte essentiel à un extrait par ailleurs déroutant des mémoires du chef de l’état-major de la défense de l’époque, le général Jean V. Allard.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.222 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Northern Mariner / Le marin du nordSame topicMilitary History and StrategyFrench-language works237,207