MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4235738010 · doi:10.1017/9781108902700.003

Wildman Whitehouse, William Thomson, and the First Atlantic Cable

2020· book-chapter· en· W4235738010 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bruce J. Hunt

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHistory and Developments in Astronomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDispute resolutionEngineeringTelecommunicationsEconomic historyHistoryPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"The first attempt to lay a transoceanic cable, the Atlantic cable project of 1856–58, had far-reaching effects on electrical theory and practice. Although it was launched by an American, Cyrus Field, the project soon came to be dominated by British capital and technical expertise. Among the leading figures in the Atlantic Telegraph Company were Charles Bright, the young chief engineer; Wildman Whitehouse, a Brighton surgeon turned electrical experimenter; and William Thomson, professor of natural philosophy at Glasgow and a member of the company’s board of directors. Whitehouse and Thomson had argued about signal propagation and cable design before joining the company; the circumstances of this dispute, and of its temporary resolution early in 1857, shed valuable light on how scientific and practical concerns interacted in the project, particularly around questions of measurement. The dispute flared again when the Atlantic cable failed in September 1858 after only a month of fitful service. The response to that failure would shape British cable telegraphy and electrical physics for decades to come."

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0630.018

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.153 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooks→Same topicHistory and Developments in Astronomy→French-language works237,207→