MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974326934 · doi:10.1353/his.2010.0004

"The fostering care of Government": Lord Dalhousie's 1821 Survey of the Eastern Townships

2010· article· fr· W1974326934 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
J. I. Little

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoire sociale · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian History and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)GeographyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pour les Cantons de l'Est du Bas-Canada d'avant 1829, année où l'on consentit enfin à la région ses propres circonscriptions électorales, les pétitions étaient pour ainsi dire le seul mode d'expression de la volonté populaire. L'assemblée législative faisait toutefois la sourde oreille à de nombreuses pétitions de colons majoritairement américains de la région, les députés de langue française ne voulant pas faciliter l'établissement de protestants anglophones dans la colonie. Un sondage réalisé en 1821 sur ordre du gouverneur récemment désigné de l'Amérique du Nord britannique, Lord Dalhousie, donna l'occasion à certains porte-parole locaux d'exprimer des doléances, surtout au sujet des obstacles à l'installation. Le sondage ne fut jamais publié et son questionnaire, restreint, ne fut distribué qu'à petite échelle, mais il aide un peu mieux à comprendre ce qui fait en sorte que cette région limitrophe située entre la frontière nord de la Nouvelle-Angleterre et la zone seigneuriale du Bas-Canada est demeurée une terre de colonisation dont les institutions sociales restaient encore largement sous-développées près de 30 ans après son ouverture à la colonisation.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoire socialeSame topicAustralian History and SocietyFrench-language works237,207