MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Growth of the Shipping Interests, 1910-1919

2012· book-chapter· en· W2912629808 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gordon Boyce

Bibliographic record

VenueLiverpool University Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Ports and Logistics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)SubsidiaryCapital (architecture)International tradePeriod (music)EconomyPromotion (chess)Forecast periodBusinessPolitical scienceEconomicsGeographyHistoryFinanceMultinational corporationAncient historyPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter examines the growth of the Furness Group’s shipping services between 1910 and 1919, as world trade, shipping values, and freight rates escalated after a brief slump. It charts the wave of acquisitions during the period, and considers the expansion of the Furness Group within the context of the industry-wide changes taking place. It offers an overview of the Furness Group’s performance, followed by an overview of their expansion strategy. Next, it focuses on the purchase and reconstruction of five financially weak firms between 1910-1912. It continues with development and expansion of South American trade. Further competitive difficulties arose between the Furness Group, International Mercantile Marine, and Canadian Pacific Railroad, including expansion efforts in New York and Rotterdam and related wartime developments. It concludes that in contrast to Furness’ promotion efforts at the beginning of the century, no new shipping subsidiaries were floated during this period, so capital gains were not realised as shipping values rose.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.160
Teacher spread0.141 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLiverpool University Press eBooksSame topicMaritime Ports and LogisticsFrench-language works237,207