Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jacques Cartier, one of the earliest European travellers along the Labrador coast, left a lasting impression of it in 1534 with his casual reference to its stark outline as "the land that God gave Cain."This impression endured until the eighteenth century, when George Cartwright, writing in a more factual tradition of travel literature, recorded in his journal, "Although, in sailing along the coast, the astonished mariner is insensibly drawn into a conclusion, that this country was the last which God made, and that he had no other view than to throw there, the refuse of his materials, as of no use to mankind, yet, he no sooner penetrates a few miles into a bay, than the great change, both of the climate and the prospects, alter his opinion."Cartwright, who lived in Labrador year round, recognized its beauty more fully -its sculpted bays and inlets, its miles of untrodden winter white, its skies of aquamarine.He was the first Labrador apologist in the picturesque tradition.The last was Harry Paddon, physician, Victorian, and gardener, one who recalled his initial visit to Lake Melville in 1912 this way: "Here was a Garden of Labrador which during a season of each year could produce vegetables as good as those which would be grown in the Garden of Eden itself."Paddon might also be considered the first Labrador nationalist, the initial to regard its mixed, scattered population as an entity and the first to sentimentalize their homeland as a place.His memoir consists of 427 typed pages, an elaborate reconstruction from journal-letters circulated to family members in the United Kingdom and articles published in magazines and periodicals.The present edition is based on a copy sent to Methuen & Co. in 1938 under the working
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 | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.448 | 0.260 |
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".