MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999641634 · doi:10.7202/019126ar

Les échanges commerciaux de la colonie laurentienne avec la Grande-Bretagne, 1760-1850

2008· article· fr· W1999641634 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marc Vallières, Yvon Desloges

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d histoire de l Amérique française · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsParks CanadaUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le port de Québec a joué un rôle majeur dans l’important commerce colonial transatlantique avec les métropoles française et britannique. L’historiographie canadienne a depuis longtemps mis l’accent sur le volet exportation des ressources naturelles de ces échanges, tant les fourrures que les produits du bois, mais a rencontré des obstacles à cerner la place des importations des produits autres que les alcools et certaines denrées taxées. Se fondant sur un dépouillement et une analyse statistique critique des importants registres de la douane britanniques (Archives nationales du Royaume-Uni, séries CUST), cet article fait ressortir la prédominance des produits industriels britanniques, essentiellement les textiles, ainsi que d’une multitude de produits métallurgiques, alimentaires et autres reflétant tout l’éventail des milliers de produits arrivés sur le marché de consommation canadien de 1760 jusqu’à 1850. Il amorce dans deux cas (textiles et métallurgie) une étude plus approfondie de la composition de ces importations et de leurs retombées sur la production locale, tant artisanale qu’industrielle. Globalement, il en ressort aussi que la valeur des importations surpasse nettement celle des exportations pour cette période, une conclusion surprenante et controversée.

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, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.215 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations12
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d histoire de l Amérique françaiseSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207