To Hear the Whistle Blow: Technology and
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article studies an attempt to establish a cooperative short-line railroad in central Alberta farm country, and examines the manner in which struggles over technological change establish key sites for political judgment and action, the formation of political subjectivity and the re-imagination of citizenship and community in the Canadian countryside. Drawing on extensive interviews with farmers, the case is situated in the context of the history of grain-handling on the Prairies, the recent closure of country elevators and railway branch lines, and the struggle to maintain community-based alternatives to centralized grain-handling. The technologies of grain-handling are treated as unconventional media that structure temporal and spatial experience—and political possibility—on the Prairies. RÉSUMÉ Cet article décrit la tentative d’établissement d’une petite ligne de train sous la forme d’une coopérative dans la région agricole du centre de l’Alberta et met en lumière comment les difficultés rencontrées avec les changements technologiques comprennent des espaces clés pour le jugement politique et l’action, la création d’une subjectivité politique et une nouvelle conception de la citoyenneté et de la communauté dans le Canada rural. Partant d’un large éventail d’entrevues auprès des agriculteurs, l’étude se situe dans le contexte de l’histoire des élévateurs à grain dans les prairies, la récente fermeture tant des élévateurs que des lignes de train dans les campagnes, ainsi que la bataille pour préserver des solutions de remplacement communautaires face à la centralisation de la gestion du grain. Les technologies de gestion du grain sont abordées comme des médias non conventionnels structurant l’expérience dans le temps et l’espace, ainsi que les possibilités politiques dans les prairies.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".