Bibliographic record
Abstract
A two page letter written by Sir Isaac Brock in York, Upper Canada to James FitzGibbon on July 29, 1812. The name of the recipient is not included but according to Mary Agnes FitzGibbon, one can find a transcript of the letter in her "A Veteran of 1812", page 60.[1812], 29 July: Major-General Isaac Brock, York, to James FitzGibbon.\n \nI lament that you should have been so long impressed with the idea that I possessed the means of being serviceable to you. I had scarcely heard of Mr. Johnson having declined a Company in the Glengarry (which would have given me the nomination) but I received account of his being reinstated. I consequently thought no more of the business thinking that officer was enjoying the fruits of his good fortune. I know not positively whether Mr. Johnson is reinstated, but being under obligations to promote his views, I cannot possibly interfere to his prejudice.\n\nI rather wonder you did not hear that Lieut Lamont had long ago my promise of nominating him to the Company provided it became vacant, which of course would have precluded my application in your behalf. Altho you must be sensible of the impossibility of my taking any step to forward your views in the present case, yet be assured I shall always feel happy in any opportunity that may offer to do your service.\n\nTo a person unaccustomed to my writing I scarcely would hazard sending this scrawl. \n\nI am, Dear Sir, Yours faithfully, Isaac Brock\n\nI should like to be among the 49th at this moment. I am satisfied they will support and even add to their former fame. They have my very best wishes. The 41st are behaving nobly at Amherstburg.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".