Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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.
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".