MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967636494 · doi:10.3366/anh.2012.0059

An insight into commercial natural history: Richard Glennon, William Hinchy and the nineteenth-century trade in giant Irish deer remains

2012· article· en· W1967636494 on OpenAlexaff
Juliana Adelman

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Natural History · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistory of Science and Natural History
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrishNatural historyDatabase transactionEconomic historyHistoryEthnologyEcologyBiologyPhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the gentlemanly status of natural history research and collecting during the nineteenth century, there was a wide commercial network that was necessary to supply the booming demand for specimens from scientists, hobbyists and public institutions. This article is a case study of two dealers in giant Irish deer remains, Richard Glennon and William Hinchy. I argue that examining how they transacted their business can give us insight into the workings of commercial natural history. The dealer-buyer relationship resembled one of patronage despite the fact that they were engaging in a commercial transaction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Natural HistorySame topicHistory of Science and Natural HistoryFrench-language works237,207