MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2305822160 · doi:10.14288/1.0095360

A community of working men : the residential environment of early Nanaimo, British Columbia, 1875-1891

2010· article· en· W2305822160 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ben Lawrence Moffat

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis discusses the growth of the coal mining town of Nanaimo, British Columbia an industrial settlement in a New World wilderness. The people who settled Nanaimo came, for the most part, from British coal mining regions. They came to improve their standard of living, but, as in Britain, worked in a capital and labour intensive industry. This thesis examines their patterns of settlement in this new town on the Pacific and stresses the analysis of occupational mobility, residential segregation, and levels of home ownership. Parallels to and departures from British experiences are discussed. Initially Nanaimo's land was relatively cheap, wages were steady, the town was clean, single family dwellings made an "open" settlement, and some opportunities existed for upward occupational mobility. For these reasons British miners found Nanaimo an improvement over British colliery towns. Yet as Continental Europeans and Asian immigrants increased in number, as the total population grew, as neighbourhoods became more segregated, and as coal markets softened unrest mounted. Increases in land costs, racial animosity, and residential segregation were all forces shaping Nanaimo in 1891, the final year of the study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0170.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.157 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207