Lieutenant W. R. Broughton (commanding HMS <i>Chatham</i>), James Johnstone (Master), Archibald Menzies (surgeon/naturalist) and the survey of the San Juan Archipelago, 1792
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Captain George Vancouver's report to the Admiralty, published in the account of his 1790–1795 expedition, failed to give sufficient notice to the importance of Lieutenant William Broughton's boat survey investigations of the San Juan islands. In fact, in that publication, it was dismissed in a few lines of text (appearing as five lines of print in Lamb's re-published edition of 1984). Only the first survey of the islands, made on 18–22 May 1792, gets a mention. That of Johnstone's later visit (with Menzies) from the Birch Bay anchorage on 18–19 June was omitted. An account of Johnstone's second investigation of San Juan Archipelago is found in no other source than in Menzies's own unpublished journal. The present author has attempted to address the imbalance and suggests a logical sequence by which Johnstone could have visited those islands not surveyed on the earlier occasion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.009 |
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".