MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Cities and Industry, Sewage and Waste

2001· book-chapter· en· W3100268502 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John T. Cumbler

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2001
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmerican Environmental and Regional History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)State (computer science)MillEconomic historyHistoryPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1886, James Olcott, a farmer, “having been bred in the old anti-slavery reform,” gave a speech before the Agricultural Board of Connecticut. Recalling an earlier age, he encouraged his audience and “the common people” of Connecticut to “agitate, agitate,” in order to “cleanse” the state of the “social evil” of the pollution “by sewage from families and factories, festering in every pool, and mill pond—formerly trout holes.” Olcott reminded the farmers that “our best hold on polluted streams reform lies in the fact that the mischief has brought on us its calamitous consequences in this country with such rapidity that men and women too not very greyhaired and in full bodily and mental vigor can shut their eyes and review the whole matter from its beginning.” The history Olcott conjured up was the transformation of a clean, clear environment from “one of the most salubrious to one of the worst in the world.” The change was intimately linked to the rise of industrial cities like Bellows Falls, Chicopee, Hartford, New Britain, and Holyoke. Although Olcott’s remembrance of the past was partly colored by romantic notions of a purer age, the pollution he pointed to was indeed a problem of growing obviousness and concern. Reflecting the rapid change that had occurred over the last quarter century, the Massachusetts State Board of Health complained that with the growth of densely populated industrial cities, the old habits of disposing of waste contributed to “a large part of the filth in our state,” and that “often the water which is used for domestic purposes [is disposed of] by being thrown upon the surface of the ground, or collected in loosewalled vaults and cesspools,” which might have been acceptable in a rural community but caused concern in the new industrial cities. As the New Hampshire Board of Health noted in 1887, looking back over the last few decades, “when men mass, . . . the conditions at once become aggravated. . . . Man comes in with his artificial constructions and sweeps away much of this economy of nature.”

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooks→Same topicAmerican Environmental and Regional History→French-language works237,207→