Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the opening days of 1776, Tom Paine's influential tract Common Sense rolled off the presses and rushed straight into the swirling firestorm that increasingly consumed the imperial dispute. The newly arrived English immigrant appeared on the scene as though sent from central casting as one of Jefferson's emigré revolutionaries in the Summary View , and promptly set his distinctive stamp on the events and philosophical debate in the six months or so prior to the formal declaration of American independence. By the time Paine's pamphlet reached his American audience, much had changed in even a few years, and what little goodwill that remained in Anglo–American relations after years of strain had largely disappeared. American blood had been shed by British troops, and a hastily recruited Continental Army lay siege to the British garrison in Boston. Quite in keeping with the turbulent passions of the time, Paine's incendiary rhetoric advanced the colonial position in a way hitherto unseen in the more than decade-long dispute between the colonists and the British government. Common Sense marked a departure from previous statements of the colonial position in several ways. First, Paine expressly and unambiguously made the case for American independence from the British Empire. He showed no desire to quibble over legitimate spheres of imperial jurisdiction or to engage in extended discussions of the colonists' legal and constitutional links with the mother country. For Paine, Britain ruled the empire, and the Americans should and must leave it.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".