MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124876626 · doi:10.7202/1074377ar

Debt Amongst Friends: Sympathy in Exchange and the Narration of a Transatlantic Credit Network, 1792–1837

2021· article· en· W3124876626 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Michael Borsk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Historical Association · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSympathyDebtCapitalismCreditorEconomicsSolidarityNarrativeSociologyPolitical economyEconomyPolitical scienceLawFinanceSocial psychologyPsychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conversations about credit in the transatlantic world were often suffused with accounts of feelings. More than just a warm gloss on the cold calculation of commerce in both merchant and settler economies, emotional exchanges played an integral role in the maintenance of credit relationships. The letters that circulated between John Large and his network of friends, family, and commercial contacts around the Atlantic reveal the importance of sympathy to his commercial relationships. Whether trading in the Caribbean and the United States or settling in Upper Canada, Large’s economic self-interest could never be excised from the wider world of sentimental sociability. As both a creditor and debtor, his economic undertakings were as concerned with hearts and souls as they were with trading balances and investment returns. In the world of transatlantic credit networks, sympathy was a colonial relationship, exchanged in commercial arrangements according to the ideal of friendship. Large’s correspondence, therefore, sits at the crossroads where credit’s moral economies met an expanding colonial capitalism during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0190.014
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.154 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Historical AssociationSame topicHistorical Economic and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207