MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1746530381

Did the Lamont Glass Company (Trenton, nS, ca. 1890-1897) Produce Pressed Glass Tableware? Conflicting Evidence from Artifacts and Folklore

2008· article· en· W1746530381 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. Victor Owen, Stephen T. Powell

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterial Culture Review / Revue de la culture matérielle · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaMineralogyLead glassStained glassBariumGlass industryMetallurgyArtMaterials scienceChemistryArchaeologyHistoryEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large amounts of soda-lime pressed glass tableware, lamp chimneys, bottles and other glass objects were manufactured in Trenton, where three glassworks (Nova Scotia Glass Co., Lamont Glass Co. and Humphreys Glass Co.) operated between ca. 1881 and 1917. Most Trenton pressed glass tableware has traditionally been assigned to the Nova Scotia Glass Co., but based on interviews dating to the 1950s of individuals not directly connected with the industry, standard reference books on historical Canadian glass have attributed specific patterns to Lamont, notwithstanding that virtually none of this glass, other than bottles, is marked by the maker. Colourless Lamont bottles contain 1.2-2.6 wt% barium oxide (BaO). This ingredient increases the refractive index of glass to which it is added, giving it a brilliant luster akin to that of lead crystal, an attribute that clearly would be advantageous in pressed glass. Barium, however, was not detected in any analyzed Nova Scotian pattern glass, thereby casting doubt not only on the suggestion that Lamont produced tableware, but also on the research methodology that gave rise to this apparent myth in the first place. Resume De grandes quantites de vaisselle de verre sodocalcique presse, verres de lampes a petrole, bouteilles et autres objets de verre, ont ete produites a Trenton, ou trois verreries (Nova Scotia Glass Co., Lamont Glass Co. et Humphreys Glass Co.) etaient en activite entre 1881 environ et 1917. La plupart des objets de verre de Trenton etaient traditionnellement attribues a la Nova Scotia Glass Co., mais, en nous fondant sur des entrevues remontant aux annees 1950 d’individus qui n’etaient pas directement lies a l’industrie, on s’apercoit que les ouvrages de reference typologique sur le verre historique au Canada ont attribue des series specifiques a Lamont, en depit du fait que quasiment aucun des objets de verre, hormis les bouteilles, ne porte de marque de fabrique. Les bouteilles incolores Lamont contiennent de 1,2 a 2,6 % d’oxyde de baryum (BaO). Cet additif accroit l’indice de refraction du verre, lui donnant un lustre et un brillant comparable a celui du cristal de plomb, attribut nettement avantageux dans le cas du verre presse. On n’a pas, cependant, decele de barium dans la verrerie usuelle en Nouvelle-Ecosse, ce qui permet de mettre en doute le fait que Lamont aurait produit de la verrerie de table, mais aussi la methodologie de recherche qui a donne naissance en premier lieu a ce qui semble etre un mythe.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterial Culture Review / Revue de la culture matérielleSame topicHistorical and Cultural Archaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207