Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Spaniards and the Portuguese came to the New World with the means to reproduce their societies and their landscapes. On his second voyage to the Caribbean in 1493, for example, Columbus brought 1,500 men in 17 ships to settle in Española. He also brought seeds to grow wheat, as well as vegetables, fruit trees and grape vines, horses, cattle, sheep, goats, and pigs. Over the following decades, as the Spaniards spread across the islands of the Caribbean Sea and into the mainland, they took with them their companion species – their “portmanteau biota,” as Alfred Crosby has called them. Even when their aim was purely military, the conquistadores traveled with at least horses and war dogs; but when they settled they made every effort to grow the plants and raise the animals so necessary for a proper (Mediterranean) diet: wheat for bread; olive trees and grapes for oil and wine; sheep and cattle for meat, milk, and cheese, wool for warm clothing, and leather for saddles and bags; and so forth. And they grew sugar cane, with a view to producing sugar for export to Europe. The Portuguese, intent at first on trade and later settlement, followed closely with sugar and slaves, cattle and horses, and planted their engenhos on the eastern coasts of South America. In the process of developing the specialized ecosystems that maintained these plants and animals, the Spanish and the Portuguese transformed not only the ways in which the land was used and hence the landscapes, but the physical environment itself. The invaders were successful, Crosby suggests, where their portmanteau biota thrived and transformed the indigenous worlds.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".