MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1595169621

Searching for Truth in the Fast Day Sermons of 1812

2007· article· en· W1595169621 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amelia Benner

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - IWU (Illinois Wesleyan University) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpanish Civil WarConvictionNeutralityLawNavyDozenPolitical scienceHistoryEconomic history
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is a vast generalization to say that all Federalists were anti-war, and that Federalist, anti-war feeling was centered in the Puritan northeast. It is equally an oversimplification to assume that all westerners and southerners were pro-war Republicans. But these assumptions were just as common at the time as they are today. The war of 1812, although not one of the most significant wars in the nation’s history, is one of the most complex. Over the years, dozen of causes have been suggested for the conflict: American merchants’ profits from the war in Europe, westerners’ attempt to further expand the country’s borders, or even a Napoleonic conspiracy against Britain. The simplified explanation is this: Despite avowed neutrality in the war between Britain and France, the United States was steadily being drawn into the conflict. American merchant ships traded with both countries and thus became the target of both the British and French navies. The British navy, suffering from a high desertion rate and desperate for sailors, began seizing American merchant ships and impressing American seamen to fill their ranks. A series of skirmishes with the British-backed Shawnee along the Canadian border solidified President James Madison’s conviction that open conflict was necessary, and Congress declared war on Britain on June 18, 1812.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.026
Scholarly communication0.0120.010
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - IWU (Illinois Wesleyan University)Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207