Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several years ago, on the occasion of the 200th anniversary of the founding of Fordham University, Father Joseph McShane, S.J., president of the university, suggested to the Board of Directors of Fordham University Press that a special selection of some of the letters composing the Jesuit Relations be printed.This document is a foundational text for French Canada-indeed, for North America-and an extremely important source of ethnographic, anthropological, and theological information concerning both the Society of Jesus in the New World and the indigenous peoples whom the Jesuits sought to convert to Christianity.Although many editions of the Jesuit Relations exist, and although various selections of some of the letters have been issued, the intent of this project is to provide modern, contemporary-feeling translationsor, rather, paraphrases-that would be readable, and, perhaps, to some readers, inspiring.The goal was to reinstate correspondence in its vernacular, natural, conversationally compelling tenor.Basing the paraphrases on Reuben Gold Thwaites's compendious collection of the Relations-The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents: Travels and Explorations of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France, 1610-1791 (originally published in Cleveland in 1898 and now available in CD form and online as Jesuit Relations, volumes 1-73)-we brought together
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.380 | 0.157 |
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".