MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2517641178 · doi:10.1111/hic3.12334

As the Tsunami of Histories of Atlantic and Liberal Revolutions Wash up in Upper Canada: Worries from a Colonial Shore – Part One

2016· article· en· W2517641178 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHistory Compass · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnachronismScholarshipNarrativeColonialismHistoryAtlantic WorldOrder (exchange)Perspective (graphical)ShorePolitical scienceArchaeologyLawAncient historyOceanographyArtLiteraturePoliticsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In two parts, this article reviews the unusually large number of books about Upper Canada (1791–1841), the British colony that became the province of Ontario, published since 2010. Non‐national approaches, especially Atlantic world but borderlands and British imperial as well, are prevalent. In particular, Atlantic history's interest in the age of revolution has dovetailed with Ian McKay's call to adopt a liberal order framework. Yet many of these works struggle to incorporate Upper Canada in ways that do not cast it as an anomalous or anachronistic space defined by its awkward relationship to a master narrative or that do not re‐inscribe older national narratives by which Upper Canada masquerades as the nascent nation. At the same time, claims to have adopted a novel perspective have tended to divert attention from existing scholarship on closely related themes, especially work on the colony's legal history. Interest in Atlantic and liberal revolutions has brought renewed attention to Upper Canada but not always in helpful ways.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.185 · 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