Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter investigates translation and censorship in the liberal democracies of Canada and the United States of America (USA) during wartime, marked by heightened political tensions. Canada and the USA, along with their Allies, resorted to censorship of interlingual communications during World War I, World War II and, in Canada, during the October Crisis of 1970, and includes an overview of censorship legislation in the two countries. Targeted by censorship is the press (e.g., in Canada, the Japanese civil rights newspaper The New Canadian ; in the USA, the Missouri-based, German-language newspaper Staats Zeitung ) linked as much to wartime morale as to intelligence, and postal censorship of, for example, commercial correspondence, which is usually linked to espionage as well as intelligence gathering. Both civilian and military mail, including the mail of service people and the correspondence of prisoners-of-war and internees, could be subjected to censorship in support of economic warfare, security and intelligence, and such censorship work was often carried out by various organisations. Bilingual or multilingual readers of foreign languages were recruited to translate in Canada often in close collaboration with Great Britain because of the two nations&s; colonial ties, and in the USA.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".