MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2565694631

Британская колониальная политика и межэтнические отношения в Канаде в последней трети XVIII века

2015· article· ru· W2565694631 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Нохрин Иван Михайлович

Bibliographic record

VenueMagistra Vitae: электронный журнал по историческим наукам и археологии · 2015
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProclamationColonialismPoliticsEthnic groupPolitical scienceIndependence (probability theory)Context (archaeology)AutonomyColonial periodPopulationEconomic historyEthnologyHistoryPublic administrationLawSociologyDemography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article is devoted to the problem of the transformation of British colonial policy in North America towards inter-ethnic relations in English and French population. The author divides it into three successive stages. The first stage is the policy of assimilation, which was approved by the Royal proclamation of 1763 (1760s). The second stage is the integration efforts of colonial administration to promote the French Canadians to public-political life of the colony with the preservation of their cultural and legal autonomy, which resulted in the adoption of the Quebec act of 1774 (1770s). And the third stage is the policy of isolation, which began in the 1780s with migration of the loyalists after the American War of Independence (1780-1790s). Each of them is analyzed in the context of socio-political processes taking place in British North America in the second half of XVIII century. The research result is the conclusions on the extent and nature of the influence of British colonial policy on inter-ethnic relations in XIX century-Canada.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.225 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagistra Vitae: электронный журнал по историческим наукам и археологииSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207