MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127532258 · doi:10.2307/2700640

Field of Glory: The Battle of Crysler's Farm, 1813

2002· article· en· W2127532258 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
C. Edward Skeen, Donald E. Graves, Richard V. Barbuto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American History · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattleGloryNarrativeHistoryOrder (exchange)Spanish Civil WarLawLiteratureAncient historyArtPolitical scienceArchaeologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The War of 1812 continues to attract historical attention. In the last decade alone, nearly two hundred works appeared relating to the war, over sixty of them books. These two books show that the interest continues and the quality is reaching new levels. The war has always fascinated Canadians, and in recent years several works have been turned out by Canadian historians. Donald E. Graves may be the most competent of the modern Canadian military historians. His preference, as shown in his earlier works, has been to bore into a single battle and relate it in great detail. Having completed a study of the battle of Lundy's Lane, Graves now turns to a more obscure battle at Crysler's Farm in November 1813. Because it is obscure, Graves spends a lot of time setting the stage for the battle (he does not get to the actual battle until the second half of the book). For the background, Graves utilizes secondary American sources heavily, but he also brings in many Canadian sources that enliven and enrich his narrative. Graves also pays great attention to details, both in his narrative and in appendices, relating to organization, ammunition and weapons, order of battle, and strength of each side. While the average reader might find some of these details tedious, military buffs will be delighted.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.233
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of American HistorySame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207