MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224095343 · doi:10.26522/tg.v7i1.3649

Acadian Expulsion of 1755 as an Expression of British Imperial Interests

2022· article· en· W4224095343 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Yannick Grignon

Bibliographic record

Venuethe general brock university Undergraduate journal of history · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllegianceHomelandDeportationEmpireBritish EmpireHistoryExpression (computer science)Sign (mathematics)SimplicityProtestantismImperial unit systemLawSociologyAncient historyPolitical sciencePhilosophyImmigrationEpistemologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper seeks to answer the question “why did the British Empire expel the Acadians from their homeland in 1755?” Despite the simplicity of the question, the answer is decidedly more complex. This essay goes through the many factors contributing to their deportation, from historical equivalents that proved the expulsion was not an isolated event, the Acadians’ inability to comprehend what was coming and respond accordingly as well as their refusal to sign oaths of allegiance, and the British designs for Acadia as a potential Protestant colony suitable for economic growth and defence against the French Empire. This paper also discusses the significant roles individual actors like William Shirley and Charles Lawrence played by acting on their own accord, and how the British justified an act many considered reprehensible, even in the 18th century, due to it being part of a wider Imperial attitude.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.015
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.218
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuethe general brock university Undergraduate journal of historySame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207