Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter addresses black hunger in Nova Scotia. When white Loyalists fled the mainland American colonies, they transported ideas about hunger prevention with them. As refugee colonists, they advocated for food aid based on their knowledge of previous colonization efforts. In Nova Scotia, they blocked black colonists' access to land while taking more of it for themselves, and they enacted food laws to avoid famine. Their actions became a way to fight white hunger while ignoring—and sometimes creating—black hunger. Because white Loyalists interfered with black people's food choices while keeping them from obtaining land, their actions in Nova Scotia can be characterized as victual imperialism. These food laws were so consequential because they stopped black colonists from producing and obtaining edible commodities using the methods that had previously worked in land-scarce environments. Ultimately, black hunger was a product of several factors: inadequate planning prior to migrants' arrival in the province, land dearth, distance from food-aid distribution centers, unfavorable weather, and, finally, the introduction of laws controlling bread production, fish harvesting, and marketing practices.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".