Tracking the Fossil Footprints and Letters of Science from Doctor E. F. Harding in Windsor, Nova Scotia: 1842-1855
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three hand-written letters from Dr. Ebenezer Fitch Harding to J. W. Dawson between 1845 and 1855 provide an example of the “collective” aspect of early geology. Dr. Harding was a community physician in Windsor, Nova Scotia, when he accompanied Charles Lyell during Lyell’s visit to the geology sites and mud flats of the Minas Basin, Bay of Fundy in the summer of 1842. The three letters span the period at the dawn of Nova Scotia geology and give insight into Dr. Harding’s personal interest, contributions to science, and relationship with Dawson in Pictou, Nova Scotia. Examination of the transcribed letters document this important period in Nova Scotia geology, demonstrate linkages between Nova Scotia and Edinburgh, and suggest future work to consider the development of the visual language of geology in Nova Scotia. The history and status of a fossil trackway named by Dawson as Hylopus hardingi provides further insights into the nature of collections and collaborations between Harding and Dawson.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".