MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966509134 · doi:10.3138/carto.45.1.32

Mapping Champlain's Travels: Restorative Techniques for Historical Cartography

2010· article· en· W1966509134 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Margaret Pearce, Michael Hermann

Bibliographic record

VenueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)NarrativeDreamIndigenousCartographyToponymyMental mappingHistorySpace (punctuation)GeographyVisual artsArtLinguisticsArchaeologyLiteraturePsychologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Samuel de Champlain's travels through what would become New France have been extensively documented and mapped by geographers and historians today. As conventional cartographic depictions of the routes of a European explorer and colonizer, these maps portray the locational details of Champlain's journeys but omit the emotional geographies and the sense of place evoked in his journals, as well as the Indigenous geographies interwoven with Champlain's story. This article suggests techniques for restoring multiple experiences and multiple voices to the historical cartography of Champlain's travels, including the expressive use of colour and type, the blending of spatial and temporal scales in sequential insets, the incorporation of mental maps and dream geographies, and the representation of Native voices through place names and imagined dialogue. In so doing, the authors reimagine historical cartography for the representation of place rather than space by taking a narrative approach to cartographic language.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.014
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations35
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and GeovisualizationSame topicGeographies of human-animal interactionsFrench-language works237,207