MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791471063 · doi:10.1080/00822884.2018.1432283

European Expansion and the Contested North Atlantic

2018· article· en· W2791471063 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stephanie Pettigrew, Elizabeth Mancke

Bibliographic record

VenueTerrae Incognitae · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNorwegianSovereigntyGeographyMultinational corporationAtlantic WorldNarrativeHistoryFisheryPolitical scienceAncient historyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scholarship discussing European expansion into the North Atlantic and territorial claims over Newfoundland rarely examines the impact of Dano-Norwegian claims in Greenland. This article integrates the history of the Greenland Norse into the narrative of European expansion to better understand the multinational nature of the early modern North Atlantic fishery. It discusses the rise of island-Iberia in response to the influence of island-Scandinavia, particularly in matters of trade and imperial claims. John Cabot’s reports of “new found land” allowed the other Europeans to fish in waters beyond the Dano-Norwegian Atlantic claims, creating a multinational fishery over which no European power recognized sovereignty until the peace of Utrecht in 1713. Once Dano-Norwegian control over the North Atlantic and Europe’s cod fishery was broken, Norse occupation of Greenland on the far western edge of Europe became a forgotten though still important part of the history of European expansion.

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)0.002
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 score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.023
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTerrae IncognitaeSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207