Renewing Interest in Labour and Working-Class History in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2016, Labour/Le Travail, the journal of Canadian labour\nstudies, celebrates its 40th anniversary. Th e origins of the\njournal lie in the 1973 Learneds (now Congress). At the\nCanadian Committee on Labour History (CCLH) business\nmeeting that year, a working group was created to explore the\npossibilities of establishing a journal of labour and working-class\nhistory in Canada. In 1976, reinforced by a grant from the federal\nDepartment of Labour, thanks to the advocacy of Senator\nEugene Forsey, Labour/Le Travail launched its fi rst annual. Since\nthen, the journal and the CCLH have supported the historical\nstudy of workers, labour, and class relations. A new partnership\nwith the Canadian Association for Work and Labour Studies\n(CAWLS) bodes well for the future of the journal and speaks\nto the vibrant community of interdisciplinary researchers interested\nin issues related to work and working people in Canada.
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 | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.038 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".