MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242585482 · doi:10.3138/jcs.39.3.40

“It is Impossible for His Majesty’s Government to Withdraw from these Dominions” Britain and the Defence of Canada, 1813 to 1834

2005· article· en· W4242585482 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Terry McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian History and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMajestyGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsOrder (exchange)HistoryEconomic historyLawPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The War of 1812 showed the British government how vulnerable Canada was to an attack by the United States, particularly in the Great Lakes region. In order to defend its North American possessions, the government in London continued to maintain a naval dockyard at Kingston that for most of its existence, was under the command of Captain (later Commodore) Robert Barrie. As the American threat diminished, Barrie and his officers were able to enjoy a somewhat hedonistic lifestyle, probably unaware that serious questions were being asked in London about the viability of and even the necessity for such a station. Using the Duke of Wellington’s thoughts and comments about the defence of Canada and contemporary accounts of life in Kingston, this essay examines the political and economic realities facing the government and contrasts them with everyday life in one of Imperial Britain’s more important garrison towns.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

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 studies0.0300.021
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicAustralian History and SocietyFrench-language works237,207