Bibliographic record
Abstract
the creation of the Dominion of Canada by an Act of the British parliament in 1867, was such a considerable achievement both for the British North American provinces and for the empire generally that it has received its due attention from historians. But the imperial dimension has been inadequately treated. Though it is recognized that the contribution of one British minister Edward Cardwell, secretary of state for the colonies 1864-6 was of crucial importance in securing the early attainment of confederation,1 other imperial functionaries are apt to be represented as having done little more than respond well or badly to provincial initiatives. In particular, and understandably so in view of the obvious disarray and weakness of the Conservative party, the ministries that took office under Lord Derby in 1858 and 1866 have received less attention than they merit, whether in Canadian or imperial terms. An historiographical distortion has thus come about with regard to two individuals, as well as to British political parties, and indeed to the character of midVictorian imperialism, to say nothing of the relationship between Great Britain and Canada. This can be rectified in some degree by examining afresh the confederation policies of Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, colonial secretary in Lord Derby's second ministry (1858-9), and the earl of Carnarvon, colonial secretary (1866-7), m Derby's third ministry, as well as undersecretary to Lytton earlier. It will be seen that the episodes of 1858 and 1866-7 have their own
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".