Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the most exciting and significant themes in Irish immigrant history has been the importance of local, regional, and even national variations in the experiences of the Irish living in the many countries of what has been called the Irish Diaspora. Over the last thirty years, for example, historians have argued that Irish immigrants fared significantly better in the favorable environments of the American Far West and Midwest or even in Canada and Australia than they did in Boston, the rest of New England, or New York City. Dr. David T. Gleeson's book builds on this previous work as it sets out to explore the question of how and why Irish immigrant experiences in the nineteenth-century American South also differed from those in the Northeast. Gleeson asserts that “native tolerance” of the Irish in the South was one critical reason for such differences (p. 192). He cites several possible reasons for such tolerance, but the most significant and intriguing of them center on the Irish immigrant' enthusiastic endorsement of slavery and white supremacy, which allayed southern native' suspicions of Irish commitments to Catholicism or to Irish nationalism. Gleeson quotes one Protestant southerner who noted approvingly, “Popery …[is] a horrid system,” but the Catholic Church is “the most conservative church in the Union on the subject of slavery” (p. 119).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".