The Lord and the Lawyer: Lord Durham, Edward Livingston, and Legal Accommodation in Louisiana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Le Rapport de Lord Durham (1839) est un document écrit pour guider la gouvernance britannique des colonies canadiennes, dont l’auteur recommande l’assimilation de la population française. Pour Durham, l’État de Louisiane peut servir de modèle parfait d’assimilation d’une population d’origine française en Amérique du Nord anglophone. Durham pensait que les Louisianais d’origine française avaient adopté une identité américaine quand la Louisiane fut incorporée dans l’Union des États en 1812. En réalité, les Louisianais, qui sont sous administration territoriale des États-Unis depuis 1803, ont pris des mesures pour protéger leur identité franco-louisianaise avant 1812, notamment en gagnant de l’influence dans un gouvernement territorial, et en passant des lois pour garder en vigueur la législation en place en Louisiane avant que Napoléon vende la Louisiane aux États-Unis.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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.
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".