Bibliographic record
Abstract
When I began the research for this book in 1979 I did not know that I would finish it when the issue of whether or not we will continue to have a distinctive Public Broadcasting Service would be in the headlines.Unwittingly my parameters, CBC television drama in English 1952-84, enclose a completed era.In the late 80's the CBC faces a crisis unique in its 50-year history.Whatever comes out of it, there will be changes in how and perhaps whether Canadian television drama is made.Without the active help of the members of the CBC drama department in Toronto and Vancouver, and the cooperation of other regions there would be no book.To begin with, there would be no programmes.Moreover, if largely unknown people had not kept kinescopes in Vancouver, Winnipeg and above all in Flin Flon, I would not have been able to see many of those that have survived, for accurate description and some kinds of evaluation.No one including myself could anticipate that out of all this would come three books, each with a different focus.Of the next two books, one will present the off-camera voices-interviews with CBC creative personnel past and present.The other is a more detailed account of the internal and external constraints which have shaped the programmes, how decisions were and are made, how dramas were and are made and some reflection on the differences tape, film, High Definition digital television can make to television drama in an aesthetic sense.Despite the current crisis, it is my conviction that by the time those books appear, there will also be more high quality television drama to think about.
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 | 0.006 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.523 | 0.370 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".