Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book with its nine essays and well-crafted introduction resulted from papers presented at the 1996 conference of the Massachusetts Historical Society. David McCullough, the author of the currently popular biography of John Adams, gave the keynote address at the meeting and provided a positive comment for the book jacket. Collections of essays present well-known difficulties to the readers, but this one is much more tightly organized than most and is further strengthened by a strong introduction by its editor, Richard Alan Ryerson. Ryerson, instead of summarizing the individual essays, provides an analysis of the historiography of “Adams studies” and indicates where and how those essays fit in and what further work is required to complete the analysis of this extremely complex figure. The individual essays vary in quality but all of them give us new insights into our second president, first vice president, diplomat, political theorist, and congressman. William Pencak and John E. Ferling place Adams, along with Thomas Jefferson, in the context of colonials in a transatlantic empire. Both give us insights into his earlier career and point out paths to further research that would involve a careful analysis of how Adams's ambitions meshed with those of a wide assortment of his provincial colleagues. Gregg L. Lint analyzes Adams's earlier career as a diplomat from 1778 through the negotiations leading to the Treaty of Paris and interprets him as a bold advocate of an independent American foreign policy. Two very strong chapters by Jack D. Warren and Joanne B. Freeman examine his role as vice president and the election of 1796. Warren argues, quite convincingly, that Adams's overzealous efforts to increase the prestige of the president and executive in 1789 led George Washington to distrust his advice, while Freeman shows the most completely ad hoc personal and nonpartisan character of the election of 1796. After her analysis one is less surprised to remember that many fairly astute politicians believed that a reunion of Adams and Jefferson might be in the cards during early 1797. Richard Brown covers Adams's presidential years in terms of his complex and continuing ideas concerning the freedom of speech. Brown, correctly I believe, notes that his support and use of the sedition act did not represent a break with his more “radical” past but instead indicated a continuation of his earlier ideas. Edith Gelles presents a portrait of Abigail Adams as a first lady who not only knew politics but, in many instances, served as a confidante and sounding board for her husband.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".