Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay explores how nineteenth-century environmental technologies rendered climates mobile through an examination of a British-led mission to the Niger River in West Africa in 1841. To protect white sailors from the tropical African climate, expedition authorities invited Scottish ventilation engineer David Boswell Reid to consult on the design of three iron steam ships. Using a centralized air intake connected to a wind sail, Reid created a pressurized plenum below deck whose air he medicated by treating it with chemicals. The Niger mission exemplifies how Victorian ventilating practices were informed by unilineal theories of progress in which climate served as a key index for measuring animal, vegetable, and human progress. Regions of the globe with climates similar to Britain’s were considered ideal for colonization. Tropical climates, however, were thought to have damaging effects on European bodies. Climate was also blamed for impeding the rise of civilization. Drawing on medical journals and reports, this essay discusses nineteenth-century ventilating practices in terms of their relationship to the tropical anxieties of their time. It posits climate control as an ecological mission within the broader project of British imperialism, and shows how Western ideas about thermal comfort emerged through a discursive entanglement with racial anthropology and imperial interests in the torrid zone.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".