Maritime Certainty and International Cooperation in the Klondike and Alaska Gold Rushes, 1896-1903
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the end of the nineteenth century the Arctic was a region of potential conflict. A primary cause of conflict is uncertainty. In the Arctic and near Arctic during the Klondike and Nome rushes, a degree of certainty came from two key sources: predictable US shipping and widely-respected Canadian law enforcement. A common culture among many newcomers to the region played an important role but, drawing on Abraham Maslow’s well-known “hierarchy of needs” theory, this paper argues that generally reliable shipping and generally respected law enforcement laid the foundation for a culture of cooperation described in numerous gold rush memoirs. À la fin du 19e siècle, l’Arctique était une région de conflits potentiels. L’incertitude constitue l’une des principales causes des conflits. Dans l’Arctique et les régions voisines de l’Arctique pendant les ruées vers le Klondike et Nome, un certain degré de certitude provenait de deux sources clés : la prévisibilité du transport maritime américain et le grand respect accordé à l’application de la loi au Canada. Bien que la culture commune à bon nombre des nouveaux arrivants dans la région ait joué un grand rôle, l’auteur s’appuie sur la théorie bien connue de la « hiérarchie des besoins » d’Abraham Maslow pour soutenir qu’un transport généralement fiable et une application de la loi généralement respectée ont jeté les bases d’une culture de collaboration décrite dans plusieurs mémoires de la ruée vers l’or.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".