The Antecedents to Cascadia as a Cross Border Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the short period from 1834 to 1863, the Pacific Northwest, centered in Cascadia, was an entity in the global economy. The region became a coherent economic unit under the management of the Columbia District of the Hudson’s Bay Company, which developed an economic hinterland, a coherent economic and trade strategy, an aggressive marketing agenda and control of marketable resources in the region. It strategically built a resource base to meet market needs and played an extensive entrepreneurial function, for example selling Finish boots in California in 1840 and Puget Sound grain in western Siberia by 1843. This paper traces the broad outline of the rise and fall of this economic empire and draws attention to the role of state power, manifested at the levels of identity and legal construction, in ending the coherence of that regional entity. In a time when the logic of Cascadia on environmental and regional grounds is apparent to many, this paper highlights how the border and the attendant identities of political actors divided and ended its coherence. Its demise may offer insight into the forces which bolster the border which divides it today.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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".