MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033879093 · doi:10.1177/103237320200700204

A counter-example in the development of Great Lakes shipping: the case of Kingston Shipping Company Limited

2002· article· en· W2033879093 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting History · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Interpretation (philosophy)Business historyAccountingBusinessHistorical recordEconomicsManagementHistoryPolitical scienceArchaeologyLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the early-twentieth century development of shipping on the Great Lakes in the context of one organisation, Kingston Shipping Company Limited (KSCO). While Great Lakes shipping expanded, and its market base switched from forest products to agricultural and manufactured goods, KSCO proved to be a short-lived and non-profitable entity. An organisational-economics framework is adopted to examine KSCO’s evolution, its strategies and the role of the accounting system. While contributing to our general historical understanding of shipping on the Great Lakes, the research informs methodological debates in accounting history by utilising a theoretical framework to guide the analysis and to draw conclusions. Lastly, the study underscores the role of accounting records in business history research. Accounting records are prepared within a specific organisational context. Their analysis and interpretation provide insights into actions of individual firms. It is at this level that choices and decisions were made in terms of the environmental context.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.160 · 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