MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903101999 · doi:10.17077/1088-5943.1360

Crossing Iowa for Freedom: The Underground Railroad, Free State Settlers, and John Brown

2009· article· en· W2903101999 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lowell J. Soike

Bibliographic record

VenueIowa Heritage Illustrated · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAmerican History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderground RailroadState (computer science)Free stateArchaeologyLawHistoryPolitical scienceEconomic historyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

onas Jones was busy making bricks on a Sep tember day in 1854 when he stopped to write a friend: "You have doubtless been informed by Br.Todd of the escape of five 'human chattels' from their master on the 4th of July.We expect they are safe now."Jones was referring to the first incident in which the residents of Tabor, Iowa, assisted fugitive slaves.In early July, a Mormon family traveling from Mississip pi to Salt Lake City had stopped to camp overnight at Tabor, in extreme southwestern Iowa.Jesse West's ho tel was under construction, and two of the Mormons' slaves talked with the builders as they retrieved water from West's well.The carpenters learned that five of the six slaves desired their freedom.Within a few davs J and with the help of Tabor residents, the runaways had crossed the Nishnabotna River and reached the home of Congregationalist minister and abolitionist George B. Hitchcock in Lewis, from where they quickly moved across Iowa to Illinois, entering Canada at Detroit.In the years ahead, Jonas Jones would welcome the staunch abolitionist John Brown into his home.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0290.010
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIowa Heritage IllustratedSame topicAmerican History and CultureFrench-language works237,207