Bibliographic record
Abstract
Founded in 1841 by a royal charter, Queen’s University evolved into a national institution steeped in tradition and an abiding sense of public service. Propelled initially by its Presbyterian instincts and an attachment to Gaelic culture, Queen’s has prospered and adapted over the years to match Canada’s ever-changing dynamics. In this third volume of Queen’s University’s official history, Duncan McDowall demonstrates that the late twentieth century was a contest between expediency and tradition waged through crisis and careful evolution. Testing Tradition calibrates the durability of Queen’s vaunted traditions in the face of shifts in the broader Canadian society. During this time of massive postsecondary expansion, Queen’s grew sevenfold from a small, collegial campus of 3,100 students to a sprawling cosmopolitan place of more than 20,000 students from over 120 countries engaged in undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs. Measuring Queen’s University’s responses to concerns over social diversity, human rights, and gender equity through the eyes of its trustees, administrators, students, faculty, and the Kingston community, this volume pays particular attention to the experiences of women and visible minorities at the university. Copiously illustrated with photographs of important people, events, and aspects of campus life, this volume shows how Queen’s, in having its traditions tested, has worked to retain the best of its past, while accepting the inevitability of change.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".