MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561216699 · doi:10.7202/1037947ar

« Tout le monde à bord pour le Klondike ». Le merveilleux aéronautique et quelques projets de vols vers les gisements aurifères du nord canadien, 1897-1898

2016· article· fr· W2561216699 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Rénald Fortier

Bibliographic record

VenueScientia Canadensis Canadian Journal of the History of Science Technology and Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En 1897, des chercheurs d’or de partout dans le monde se précipitent vers le Klondike, dans ce qui est alors le district du Yukon des Territoires du Nord-Ouest. Atteindre cette région isolée du nord du Canada est pourtant difficile. Il n’y a pas de routes ou de chemins de fer et le fleuve Yukon est gelé une grande partie de l’année. En conséquence, certains aéronautes aux États-Unis et en France suggèrent que des ballons soient utilisés pour transporter des approvisionnements et / ou des prospecteurs de l’Alaska aux champs aurifères. En outre, quelques inventeurs nord-américains, dont un du Canada, proposent que les projets de dirigeable qu’ils ont mis sur papier soient construits afin de mettre en place des routes aériennes vers le Klondike. Journaux et magazines publient de nombreux articles sur ces projets. Malheureusement, pas un seul ballon ou dirigeable ne vole vers le Klondike au moment de la ruée vers l’or. De fait, aucun des dirigeables mentionnés à l’époque ne semble être complété, à supposer que leur construction ait commencé. Une équipe française se rend en Amérique du Nord avec son ballon mais cette tentative ne mène nulle part.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.009
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientia Canadensis Canadian Journal of the History of Science Technology and MedicineSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207