Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the remarkably edible landscape of Tilting, Fogo Island, Newfoundland. Tilting is a Cultural Landscape District (Historic Sites and Monuments Board) and a Registered Heritage District (Heritage Foundation of Newfoundland and Labrador). Tilting has outstanding extant examples of vernacular architecture relating to Newfoundland's inshore fishery, but Tilting was also a farming community despite its challenging sub-arctic climate and exposed North Atlantic coastal location. There was a delicate sustainable balance in all aspects of life and work in Tilting, as demonstrated through a resource-conserving inshore fishery and through finely tuned agricultural and animal husbandry practices. Tilting's landscape was “literally” edible in a way that is unusual for most rural North American communities today. Animals like cows, horses, sheep, goats, and chickens were free to roam and forage for food and fences were used to keep animals out of gardens and hay meadows. This paper documents this dynamic arrangement and situates local agricultural and animal husbandry practices in the context of other communities and regions in outport Newfoundland. It also describes the recent rural Newfoundland transition from a working landscape to a pleasure landscape.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".