Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay explores the new forms of learning that occurred, and the difficulties entailed, when European explorers like Christopher Columbus and Jacques Cartier encountered new lands and strange customs. This essay examines how the explorers filtered their perceptions and learning through their inherited cosmography. It is also offered as a rather modest initial probe into how we might write the history of adult learning in Canada before adult education was invented. Résumé Cet article examine les nouvelles formes d’apprentissage, et les difficultés impliqué à l’époque ou, Christophe Colomb and Jacques Cartier, exploreurs Européens, a l’encontre des pays neufs et des coutumes étrangères. Cet article examine comment les exploreurs filtrent leurs perceptions et apprentissages selon leurs cosmographies. De plus, l’article offre une enquête modeste au sujet de la façon dont on peut commencer à écrire l’histoire de l’éducation d’adultes au Canada, au paravent de l’invention de l’éducation d’adultes.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".