MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367155359 · doi:10.7202/1098784ar

Upper Canada’s Union Debates (1822-23, 1839-40)

2023· article· en· W4367155359 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Peter A. Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueOntario History · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpposition (politics)DeadlockPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)RevenueLawCustoms unionEconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Upper Canadian Assembly’s two debates on union with Lower Canada, especially the first, show a much greater range of views towards it than contemporaries expected. Leading members upheld the unique national character of French Canada, denouncing Britain’s attempt to use their colony to suppress another. The first debate grew out of attempts originating in a Whig member of the opposition to solve the division of customs revenue between the two, breaking the deadlock that already characterized the lower province. The second, much more strained came in the wake of the 1837 Rebellions with union as a government project to ‘put down the French’. While the second bill passed, its implementation failed as, once again, Upper Canadian members of the assembly refused the play the role in which the British government had cast them.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.182 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOntario HistorySame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207