Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Des documents laissés par un missionnaire catholique français et un capitaine acadien de navire marchand qui avait des liens avec les Antilles ont révélé que des Noirs furent réduits à l’esclavage et engagés dans d’autres relations de travail non libres par un réseau d’Acadiens de premier plan. Analysées et mises en dialogue avec des études de portée plus large portant sur l’esclavage dans les Maritimes et le silence de la mémoire collective acadienne, ces sources placent deux chefs de file bien connus de la communauté acadienne aux côtés d’autres propriétaires d’esclaves loyalistes dans les premiers temps de la Nouvelle-Écosse. Les héritiers de ces deux hommes ont signé une pétition adressée à l’Assemblée législative de la province en 1807 pour assurer que des esclaves demeuraient leur propriété, à une époque où, par ailleurs, le sentiment anti-esclavagiste et la politique abolitionniste gagnaient en influence dans l’Empire britannique. Documents left by a French Roman Catholic missionary and an Acadian merchant captain with Caribbean connections have revealed that Black people were enslaved by, and in other unfree and labouring relations with, a prominent Acadian network. Analyzed and placed into conversation with broader studies of Maritime slavery and the silences of Acadian public memory, these sources position two well-known Acadian community leaders alongside other Loyalist slaveholders in early Nova Scotia. The heirs of these two men signed an 1807 petition to the provincial legislature to secure their property in slaves at a time when anti-slavery sentiment and abolitionist policy were otherwise gaining influence in the British Empire.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".