Emigrant Worlds and Transatlantic Communities: Migration to Upper Canada in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century. By Elizabeth Jane Errington. (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2007. xii, 244 pp. Cloth, $80.00, ISBN 978-0-7735-3265-6. Paper, $29.95, ISBN 978-0-7735-3266-3.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The history of migration patterns throughout the North Atlantic world is being rewritten, and scholars are paying close attention to emigrants from a wide range of ethnic and national groups. Elizabeth Jane Errington focuses on English, Welsh, Scots, and Irish for the three decades between the end of the Napoleonic Wars and the advent of the famine in the late 1840s. She uses an impressive array of sources to get at the classic questions of what ideas and circumstances led over 2 million people to leave their homes, farms, and occupations, and to risk a sometimes dangerous passage across the Atlantic Ocean for an uncertain future in a foreign land. The author sets her sights on those emigrants who were drawn to Upper Canada, an interior colony in British North America that experienced modest growth in the wake of the War of 1812. Errington's work complements recent scholarship, especially on Irish and Scots emigrants, and provides a useful revision to studies of British emigration that are grounded primarily on the records of formal organizations and government agencies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.002 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".