Bibliographic record
Abstract
It was an annus horribilis in Montreal. On 25 April 1849, an angry mob descended on the legislature, forcing politicians to flee and burning the building to the ground. The rioting continued for a week before being quelled by British troops stationed in the city. Over the summer, prominent Montreal merchants, despairing of their well-being in the era of British free trade, discussed various remedies for their plight. In October they issued a manifesto calling for annexation to the United States. While many European nations had experienced uprisings the previous year and were no strangers to manifestos – 1848 was, after all, the year of the Communist Manifesto – the Canadian version of public protest was distinctly odd. The perpetrators were mostly conservatives (“Tories” in the vocabulary of the day), rather than liberals and radicals. Clearly, much had changed since the War of 1812. POSTWAR IMMIGRATION Between 1815 and 1850 nearly a million people emigrated from Great Britain to British North America. Phillip Buckner has argued that the Anglicization of the northern half of North America in this period, owing largely to immigration from Great Britain, is one of the most significant developments in the history of the British Empire. It is, without question, a major chapter in the history of Canada. The tide of immigration receded for a time in the 1850s, but by then the British character of much of settler society had been set. The Irish, who had been incorporated into Great Britain by the Act of Union in 1801, made up 25 percent of a British North American population approaching 2.5 million, while those identified as English and Welsh accounted for about 20 percent, and the Scottish nearly 16 percent.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.004 |
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".