MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089596235 · doi:10.7202/019753ar

Cartier, Champlain, and the Fruits of the New World

2009· article· en· W2089596235 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Victoria Dickenson

Bibliographic record

VenueScientia Canadensis Canadian Journal of the History of Science Technology and Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsMcCord Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman settlementBiotaFlora (microbiology)GeographyOld WorldAgency (philosophy)FaunaPeriod (music)EthnologyHistoryEcologyArchaeologyBiologySociologySocial scienceArtAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Much has been written of the Columbian exchange, the transfer between New World and Old of people, pathogens, flora and fauna. The biota of two hemispheres, once seemingly irredeemably separated, were interpenetrated, both through accident and through human agency. Part of this exchange involved medicinal and food plants, discovered in the New World and adopted into the Old. This paper examines the translation of a number of New World plants that were part of the 'Cartierian' or 'Champlinian' exchange that followed the voyages to North America by Jacques Cartier (1491-1557) between 1534 and 1541, and the explorations and settlements undertaken by Samuel de Champlain (1580?-1635) from 1603 to his death at Quebec in 1635. During this period, a number of North American plants were propagated in European nurseries and even found their way into everyday use in gardens or kitchens. How were these new plants viewed on their introduction and how were they incorporated into Europe's "vegetable" consciousness? Where did these new plants fit in the classification of the edible and the exotic?

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.036
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientia Canadensis Canadian Journal of the History of Science Technology and MedicineSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207