“This was not the time for this type of 1890 imperialism”: Cryolite, Control, and Canada-US Relations over Greenland, 1940
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is drawn from the unpublished second volume of Gordon Smith’s magnum opus, A Historical and Legal Study of Sovereignty in the Canadian North and Related Law of the Sea Problems. Edited and introduced by P. Whitney Lackenbauer, this article explores Canada-United States relations over Greenland in 1940, particularly whether Canada or the United States would secure de facto control over Greenland and its unique supply of cryolite, essential for the production of aluminum at that time. In doing so, Smith contributes to our understanding of how competing interests and priorities made Greenland a site of rivalry and ultimately compromise between Second World War allies. Cet article est tiré du deuxième volume inédit du grand ouvrage de Gordon Smith, intitulé A Historical and Legal Study of Sovereignty in the Canadian North and Related Law of the Sea Problems. Édité et présenté par P. Whitney Lackenbauer, cet extrait traite des relations canado-américaines relatives au Groenland en 1940, en particulier du contrôle de fait éventuel par le Canada ou les États-Unis du Groenland et de son unique approvisionnement en cryolite, essentielle à la production d’aluminium à l’époque. Ainsi, Smith nous aide à mieux comprendre la façon dont les priorités et les intérêts divergents ont fait du Groenland un site de rivalité et, en fin de compte, de compromis entre les alliés de la Seconde Guerre mondiale.
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 | 0.015 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".