Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Treaty of Paris, which ended the Seven Years/French and Indian War in 1763, had sweeping implications for European colonialism in North America. France lost virtually everything on the continent, retaining only fishing rights off Canada and a handful of Caribbean islands. Left with only unexplored and mostly inaccessible territory between the Mississippi River and the Rocky Mountains, France gave up most of her imperial dreams and ceded that land, known as Louisiana, to her ally Spain. Spain gladly received it, for she had lost Florida to Britain as a result of the treaty and was glad to control the strategic port of New Orleans in compensation. Still, the defeat rankled French and Spanish alike, and both looked forward to the day they could exact a measure of revenge. Such an opportunity arose in 1775 when Britain’s thirteen American colonies began a revolution. Spain and France were both quick to funnel illicit arms and money to the Americans, but their support remained under the table until the American victory at Saratoga in October 1777. The decisiveness of the victory impressed the government in Paris, which signed a treaty of recognition and mutual defense in February 1778. Spain hesitated to openly support the Americans, however, fearing to aid a cause that their own colonists might emulate. When Britain rebuffed Spain’s attempt to act as mediator, however, Madrid allied with France (although not with the United States) and went to war in May 1779. She hoped not only to regain Florida but also to seize the opportunity to capture Gibraltar, which the British had occupied for decades.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.686 | 0.440 |
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".