Bibliographic record
Abstract
This second volume of the Canadian State Trials series focuses on the largest state-security crisis in Canadian history, measured in terms of political prosecutions: the rebellions of 1837-8 and the associated patriot invasions in Upper and Lower Canada (Ontario and Quebec).Historians have long debated the causes and implications of the rebellions but until now they have done remarkably little work on the legal aspects of the insurrections and their aftermath.Given that over three hundred and fifty men were tried for treason or equivalent offences in connection with the events, this volume is long overdue.The essays collected here break new ground in the existing historiography of the rebellions by presenting the first comprehensive examination of the legal dimensions of the crisis.The essays, written by leading historians, legal scholars, and archivists, examine the trials and court martial proceedings as well as their political, social, and comparative contexts, including the passage of emergency legislation and executive supervision of legal responses, the treatment of women, and the plight of political convicts transported to the Australian penal colonies.This volume contributes significantly to the ongoing reassessment of the rebellion period.The exploration of the rich record of legal responses to real and perceived state-security threats also sheds light on important themes in our political, constitutional, and legal history.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.808 | 0.578 |
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".