Bibliographic record
Abstract
F EW CURATORS have had the privilege of spending a year immersed in a collection of early globes -studying them, mounting an exhibition, and writing a book about them.But that is how this present work came about.To a few of us, it was no secret that the Stewart Museum had quietly built a substantial collection of globes from about 1530 to 1850, but the extent and richness was still a surprise.The collection was larger and the pieces more complex and less well known than we had originally thought.And the Stewart Museum's broad collections of globe-related material -rare books published by the globe makers, engravings, paintings, along with terrestrial and celestial cartography -enabled us to look at the globes in a larger context.Our study expanded in scope well beyond our original plan.Our aim was to write a book that would be informative for people interested in early globes, but also in related matters such as exploration and mapping, astronomy and celestial charting, antique objects made of diverse and at times exquisite materials, and in the decorative aspects of such early artifacts.We have grouped the globes by their six European countries of origin and devoted a chapter to each country.The chapters open with an introduction to the globe production of that country, followed by an analysis of each individual globe in the collection.We have kept bibliographical and descriptive details to a minimum (the Stewart Museum welcomes further inquiries).Authorship, dates, the construction of the globe itself, the sources used to create the map image, and the globe's place in the history of globe making are dealt with.Seldom does a globe not have some especially intriguing elements, and these we have described and explained.For each terrestrial globe, we have emphasized the cartography of New France, Canada and North America as part of our contribution to what has already been written about these globes.Throughout this project, Eileen Meillon, the Stewart Museum's map curator and librarian, has been a valued collaborator.She researched and wrote the text and captions concerning the Coronelli globe, translated, edited, and proofread texts, tracked down references and copies of the literature, along with many other essential tasks.For the past year, our friend Peter van der Krogt, one of the world's leading specialists in early globes, has been an advisor.His good nature, enthusiasm and generosity with his knowledge throughout the project and during a visit in The Netherlands and in Montreal greatly assisted (and reassured) us on many important points.We are pleased that he has written the introductory essay on early globe history for this book.Robert Derome, an art historian, likewise added a significant dimension to our project.His innovative essay examines the intrinsic link between the decorative arts and globes, a subject little studied, perhaps because globes are traditionally found in libraries and archives, or in history and science museums rather than art galleries.This project benefitted from the help of many collaborators.We would like to thank the following: Goran Baarnhielm (Stockholm);
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.506 | 0.332 |
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".