MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Worldly Associations, 1836–1841

2018· book-chapter· en· W2912817183 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nancy A. Hewitt

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of North Carolina Press eBooks · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAmerican History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite (mutation)ConventionPopulationPolitical scienceLawApothecarySociologyGender studiesReligious studiesMedia studiesHistoryClassicsDemographyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rochester’s boomtown atmosphere attracted a diverse population and allowed Isaac Post to open an apothecary shop to support his still growing family. As importantly, the Posts engaged new groups of activists even as they immersed themselves in Hicksite debates over abolition, Indian rights, women’s rights, and the appropriateness of Friends participating in worldly (that is, cross-denominational) social movements. Locally, antislavery efforts were led by local blacks and by white evangelicals. Amy signed her first antislavery petition in 1837; and she and Isaac attended antislavery conventions where national leaders spoke. In 1840, they joined evangelical, Hicksite and Orthodox Friends in founding the Western New York Anti-Slavery Society (WNYASS). The WNYASS, auxiliary to the American Anti-Slavery Society, was interracial and mixed-sex. In January 1842, William Lloyd Garrison spoke at its annual convention and stayed with the Posts. That February, Amy helped organize a worldly antislavery fair. The funds were intended to help fugitives seeking refuge in Canada, suggesting that she and Isaac were also involved in the underground railroad. Clearly Amy Post’s activist worlds were expanding, complicating her relationship to the Hicksite meeting and opening up new possibilities for transforming society.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.008

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.151 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of North Carolina Press eBooksSame topicAmerican History and CultureFrench-language works237,207