Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the debate over the ownership and preservation of an artefact of the War of 1812-14: the wrecked hull of the schooner HMS Nancy, which was discovered and raised at the mouth of the Nottawasaga River in Wasaga Beach, Ontario, in the summer of 1925. The discovery precipitated a vigorous struggle for control of the artefact that pitted local historical enthusiasts and politicians against the government of Ontario and its representatives. The crux of the debate concerned where best to store and house the hull. The government initially intended to remove the Nancy’s remains to Toronto where, officials argued, the vessel could best enjoy the status of a truly national icon, while an organized group from the Nottawasaga region charged that the artefact should remain in the place it perished as the best way to honour its historical significance as a symbol of British-Canadian nationhood and to make use of its value as a tourist attraction. The events highlight the ways in which Ontarians conceptualized their history and historical meanings of place during a period of tremendous social, cultural, and economic change.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".