MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296528210 · doi:10.59643/1942-9916.1155

Wyoming Pre-Statehood Legal Materials: An Annotated Bibliography - Part II

2007· article· en· W2296528210 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Debora Person

Bibliographic record

VenueWyoming Law Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmerican Environmental and Regional History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBibliographyAnnotated bibliographyPolitical scienceLibrary scienceLawHistoryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

countries and their claims to the New World.While the predominant European influences were Spanish, French, and English, portions of what is currently the state of Wyoming or territories of which Wyoming was once a part also fell within land contested or claimed by Russia, Mexico, and the Republic of Texas.As it is generally believed that the first white person to walk parts of Wyoming was John Colter, a member of the Lewis and Clark expedition who decided to explore south of the Missouri River on the return trip from the Pacific in 1806,2 it could also be argued that these foreign laws do not apply in the instance where there is no person to govern.But rights to newly discovered land were not viewed that way historically by the powers that claimed the territory, nor by other powers that might wish to claim possession, and so these claims become part of the legal history of the state.While the European propensity toward exploration and expansion can be dated to the time of the First Crusade, for the New World, it is generally believed that the initial legal document relative to land claims was the Papal Bull issued by Pope Alexander VI in 1493, giving Spain sovereignty over lands to be discovered in the New World not already under the dominion of any Christian powers.The Spanish monarchy granted Columbus a monopoly of exploration in the region.This grant was revoked in 1495, and freedom of navigation was opened to all "merchant adventurers."The monopoly was reassigned in 1497, but by that time, Americus Vespucci had set sail, destined to rediscover the lands that would later be named after him.'Spain lay sweeping claims to the continent, without regard to boundaries, by virtue of its exploration and discovery.Interestingly, it was generally accepted that while European nations proclaimed the lands theirs, these claims were not considered binding on any indigenous rights to the property.It was, rather, to prevent similar claims from other European powers. 4 Spain was not alone in claiming large portions of the new continent.France claimed portions Spain had already staked out, arguing that Spain had not colonized the region and France's explorers had made deeper inroads, having come south from Canada and north from Louisiana.England, as well, lay claim to the northeastern states, Canada, and the Pacific Northwest.Russia moved down from Alaska and established settlements along the Pacific Coast, with forts nearly as far south as San Francisco, which it retained until 1842. 5And the United States, through its expeditions, claimed rights to the land in the Northwest based on discovery of the Columbia River.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWyoming Law ReviewSame topicAmerican Environmental and Regional HistoryFrench-language works237,207