MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626803643 · doi:10.26522/gbuujh.v2i0.1483

William Bartram: a Maker and Painter of America’s Image in its Enlightenment

2017· article· en· W2626803643 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Matthew Jagas

Bibliographic record

Venuethe general brock university Undergraduate journal of history · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArchaeology and Natural History
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnlightenmentNaturalismPaintingPoliticsArt historyNatural (archaeology)American CenturyEnvironmental ethicsAge of EnlightenmentHistoryEconomic historyPolitical scienceLawPhilosophyEpistemologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The American Enlightenment of the eighteenth century was a critical time in the early years of the emergent nation as Americans increasingly explored and investigated all fields of knowledge, from philosophy to natural science. One lesser-known early American of the period, who was especially significant to early American natural science, was the naturalist William Bartram (1739-1823), whose most vital role in the American Enlightenment was that of helping America assert itself in a scientific world largely dominated at the time by European scientists. In this respect, Bartram reinforced the efforts of men like Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin to prove America to be a capable nation able to act independently. Bartram’s work also helped to develop and advertise the image of America to the world as a young and growing nation. This paper, therefore, while first seeking to explore Bartram’s critical role as a maker and painter of America’s image during its Enlightenment, also displays some of the critical difficulties (outside of its politics) facing early America.

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 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 score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

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 studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuethe general brock university Undergraduate journal of historySame topicArchaeology and Natural HistoryFrench-language works237,207