MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318136425 · doi:10.1093/ehr/cer330

Bridging the Early Modern Atlantic World: People, Products, and Practices on the Move, ed. Caroline A. Williams

2011· article· en· W2318136425 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian R. Hamnett

Bibliographic record

VenueThe English Historical Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonialism, slavery, and trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoriographyAtlantic WorldPoliticsHistoryContext (archaeology)Diversity (politics)GenealogyPolitical scienceAncient historyLawArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Caroline Williams’s Introduction and the ten chapters by scholars from Britain, the United States, Canada, Australia and Portugal have transformed the papers of a conference held in Bristol in 2005 into a significant contribution to the historiography of the Atlantic World. The debate concerning the validity of this concept continues—given that it appears to involve the notion of an Age of Revolutions across this political sphere in the period from the 1770s to the 1820s. Parallel processes, mutual influences, and repeated contact between different races and ethnicities have suggested the existence of a common space encompassing Western Europe, West Africa and the eastern seaboards of North and South America. As result, we can no longer understand Western European history from its European context alone. Further debate has arisen concerning the relative impact of transatlantic contact and its periodisation. The editor strongly argues for early impact: ‘the unprecedented circulation of peoples, beliefs, and ideas that characterized the early modern Atlantic was driven and paralleled by an equally unprecedented circulation of goods …’ (p. 22). She sees ‘an overlapping and interconnected Atlantic world’, a ‘diversity of peoples’, and ‘countless points of contact across the Atlantic basin’ (pp. 30–31).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe English Historical ReviewSame topicColonialism, slavery, and tradeFrench-language works237,207