MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1550184676

Peter Mancall interview, "Fatal Journey: The Final Expedition of Henry Hudson"

2009· article· en· W1550184676 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marshall Poe, Peter Mancall

Bibliographic record

VenueIowa Research Online (University of Iowa) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican and British Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryGerontologyMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

You've probably heard of the Hudson River, and you may have even heard of Hudson Bay. But have you ever heard of Henry Hudson. Well you should, and now thanks to Peter Mancall's page-turning Fatal Journey: The Final Expedition of Henry Hudson (Basic Books, 2009) you can. And very pleasurably at that. Hudson was an explorer. He was looking for fame and fortune, both of which happened to be located in what Europeans called the "South Sea," that is, the Pacific Ocean. For there were found the Spice Islands on which could be found (you guessed it) spices. These spices were incredibly valuable. A boatload of spices was worth a boatload of cash. Hudson knew it, and so did everyone else. The problem was it was hard to get there, particularly from England. One had to sail around Africa, and that was no easy trick. So Hudson set about looking for a Northeast (above Russia) and Northwest (above Canada) passage. In point of fact the former exists, though only modern icebreakers (often nuclear powered) can get through it, and the latter doesn't exist at all. Hudson didn't know that. He had bad maps. So he tried, four times actually, to make it through. On the fourth voyage everything in the Far North went south, so to say. Cold, hunger, mutiny, murder. Peter tells the whole gripping tale, and very well. I'm hoping the book will be made into a movie. I'm thinking Russell Crowe (obviously) for Hudson.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.295
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIowa Research Online (University of Iowa)Same topicAmerican and British Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207