Sverdrup´s Arctic Adventures. Or: What makes an Expedition Report worth reading? – Otto Sverdrup: <i>New Land. Four years in the Arctic Regions</i> (1903)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Otto Sverdrup, born 1854, is one of the main polar explorers in Norway. However he is much less known not only than Fridtjof Nansen and Roald Amundsen, but also than Hjalmar Johansen, who was a member of Nansen´s Fram expedition 1893-96, and also lesser known than Eivind Astrup, who took part in two of Robert Peary´s expeditons across northern Greenland in 1891-92 and 1893-94. Hjalmar Johansen and Eivind Astrup published their own accounts from the expeditons: Selv-anden paa 86°14'. Optegnelser fra Den Norske polarfærd 1893-96 (1898) and Blandt Nordpolens naboer (1895). Astrup´s book was reprinted in 1990 and 2004, and Johansen´s book was reprinted in 1942, 1949 and 2003. They are both included in the Polar Library, together with books by Nansen and Amundsen (the Polar Liberary is by Kagge publishing house).Otto Sverdrup´s polar expedition report New Land (Nyt land), a two volume work from 1903, from the second Fram expedition 1898-1902 to north-west Greenland and northern Canada, is in comparison never reprinted. He is not in the Polar library. And his name is among readers of travelogues very much forgotten. Why is this, and what kind of book is New Land?
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".