MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Oxford handbook of the Atlantic world 1450-1850

2011· book· en· W1517899197 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2011
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonialism, slavery, and trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The essays in this volume provide a comprehensive overview of Atlantic history from c.1450 to c.1850, offering a wide-ranging and authoritative account of the movement of people, plants, pathogens, products, and cultural practices-to mention some of the key agents--around and within the Atlantic basin. As a result of these movements, new peoples, economies, societies, polities, and cultures arose in the lands and islands touched by the Atlantic Ocean, while others were destroyed. The team of scholars in this volume seek to describe, explain, and, occasionally, challenge conventional wisdom concerning these path-breaking developments. They demonstrate connections, explore contrasts, and probe themes. During the four centuries encompassed by this collection, pan-Atlantic webs of association emerged that progressively linked people, objects, and beliefs across and within the region. Events in one corner of the Atlantic world had effects, reverberations thousands of miles away. The great virtue of thinking in Atlantic terms is that it encourages broad perspectives, unexpected comparisons, trans-national orientations, and expanded horizons; the parochialism that characterizes so much history writing and instruction today, as in the past, has a chance of being overcome. Contributors to this volume - Ida Altman, University of Florida David Armitage, Harvard University Lauren Benton, New York University Christopher Leslie Brown, Columbia University Nicholas Canny, National University of Ireland, Galway Joyce Chaplin, Harvard University Matthew Edney, University of Southern Maine David Eltis, Emory University David Geggus, University of Florida Ira D. Gruber, Rice University David Hancock, University of Michigan Tamar Herzog, Stanford University Richard L. Kagan, Johns Hopkins University Wim Klooster, Clark University Robin Law, Stirling University John R. McNeill, Georgetown University Elizabeth Mancke, Akron University Sylvia Marzagalli, University of Nice Laura de Mello e Souza, Universidade de Sao Paulo Kenneth Mills, University of Toronto Philip Morgan, Johns Hopkins University Craig Muldrew, Cambridge University David Northrup, Boston College, William O'Reilly, Cambridge University Anthony Pagden, University of California, Los Angeles Susan Scott Parrish, University of Michigan Joao Jose Reis, Universidade Federal da Bahia Daniel K. Richter, University of Pennsylvania N.A.M. Rodger, Oxford University Jaime E. Rodriguez O, University of California, Irvine Emma Rothschild, Harvard University Joan-Pau Rubies, London School of Economics John Russell-Wood, Johns Hopkins University Jean-Frederic Schaub, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris Stuart Schwartz, Yale University Carole Shammas, University of Southern California David Shields, University of South Carolina Kevin Terraciano, University of California, Los Angeles Troy L. Thompson, University of Pennsylvania Neil Whitehead, University of Wisconsin

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it