Bibliographic record
Abstract
C anada has been a technological project.Harold Innis attributed the northern extent of the country to the fur trade and its dependence upon the canoe.The construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway was intended to knit together east and west and to secure the Prairies against encroachment from the south.In the age of iron and steam, the railroad was to form the backbone of the country; it was an instrument intended, in the memorable words of historian Pierre Berton, to realize the National Dream.When new forms of communication challenged the hegemony of the iron horse and the telegraph wires that marched alongside its rails, Canadians adopted and adapted them to the same end.Radio broadcasting began early in the twentieth century, and the Montreal station that became CFCF was among the first broadcasters in North America when it went on air in 1920.Within a decade, a Royal Commission on Radio Broadcasting had concluded that a country the size of Canada should have a publically funded radio broadcasting system.On its creation in 1932, Prime Minister R.B. Bennett harboured no doubts about its importance: the country, he said, needed "complete Canadian control of broadcasting from Canadian sources" to ensure that a "national consciousness may be fostered and sustained and national unity still further strengthened."Similar imperatives guided governance of television broadcasting when it began to expand in the 1950s. 1 Late in the 1930s, the country's largest company, Canadian National Railway (a Crown corporation), underwrote the development of Trans-Canada Air Lines, to move the mail and to offer a new, quicker form of xiv Foreword
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.701 | 0.660 |
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".