As the Tsunami of Histories of Atlantic and Liberal Revolutions Wash up in Upper Canada: Worries from a Colonial Shore – Part One
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.050 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".