MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Great Surrender

2019· book-chapter· en· W3001547955 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philip Gerard

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of North Carolina Press eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurrenderInfantrySpanish Civil WarCabinet (room)Settlement (finance)LawHistoryPoliticsQuarter (Canadian coin)Political scienceAncient historyArchaeologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Richmond has fallen; Jefferson Davis and his cabinet retreat to Greensboro by rail. Both Johnston and Sherman believe that more killing would be fruitless-the outcome of the war is inevitable. Davis wants to disband the infantry in the mountains, to fight on as guerrillas-a prospect that appalls Johnston. He persuades Davis to allow him to arrange a truce with Sherman. Sherman obliges. The two generals meet on the Hillsboro Road at the home of James and Nancy Bennitt, where Sherman confides a piece of bitter news: Lincoln has been assassinated. If they can’t conclude a peace settlement quickly, there will be no quarter given. Sherman oversteps himself, promising political and civil concessions, and calling off Stoneman’s raiders. The War Department in Washington will not accept the terms, orders Grant to relieve Sherman and take over. Grant indeed travels to Raleigh but leaves Sherman in command-to conclude the surrender along the lines of Lee’s surrender at Appomattox Court House-on April 26, 1865. It is the largest surrender of the war-90,000 troops in the Carolinas Georgia, and Florida, and effectively ends the war.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.011

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of North Carolina Press eBooksSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207