Bibliographic record
Abstract
As J. B. Brebner demonstrated in New England's Outpost (1927), the Anglo-French confrontation on the isthmus of Chignecto in the early 1750s was part of a complex British plan to govern the Acadian population of Nova Scotia, a modest prelude to the important victories at Louisbourg in 1758 and Quebec in 1759.The narrow isthmus was a testing point for the claims of two imperial powers engaged in a continental struggle that continued uninterrupted during the interval between the signing of the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (1748) and the beginning of the Seven Years' War (1756).During this confusing period of official "peace," the times seemed out of joint.There were no rules to play by, though the game of territorial influence continued unabated.While the apprehensions, fears, and disasters it produced preoccupied soldiers and civilians on both sides, we are fortunate that a few took the trouble to record their adventures, as Dr. J. C. Webster noted over forty years ago in publishing the diary of John Thomas and the journal of Louis de Courville.Already available, he said, were the journals of Joshua Winslow, John Winslow, Abijah Willard, Jacau de Piedmont, Hon.Robert Monckton, and Thomas Pichon.And we may now add to this list of adventurers the name of John Salusbury, a rather reluctant participant thrust into the midst of events in Halifax and Chignecto by virtue of a patronage appointment from the earl of Halifax, president of the Board of Trade and Plantations.Unlike his fellow journalists, Salusbury adopts the point of view of a virtual outsider, for from the time of his arrival in Governor Cornwallis's entourage, he was content to stay out of the way while a form of government was being established in Halifax and lucrative commercial arrangements were being developed by New England mer-
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.414 | 0.228 |
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".