MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386095921 · doi:10.1080/07075332.2023.2250799

The United States Consulate in Belfast and the Development of the American Consular Service, 1796–1906

2023· article· en· W4386095921 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International History Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicScottish History and National Identity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawDiplomacyPolitical scienceLegislationConstitutionService (business)ConventionState (computer science)HistoryPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The United States Consulate in Belfast and the Development of the American Consular Service, 1796-1906. This article explains the history of the development and professionalization of the United States consular service through the example of the Belfast consulate from 1796 to 1906. The first consuls were Irish merchants. By mid-century, US citizens served, with salaries for the highest grade, while lower ranks were dependent on fees for income. The demands of expanded trade and US interests abroad resulted in legislation in 1896 and 1906 that upgraded the Consular Bureau. Appointments to the Belfast consulate began to exemplify the shift from a patronaged-driven organization to an increasingly professional, career-based Consular Service.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.209 · 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