MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392548569 · doi:10.36368/jns.v9i1.793

Exploring the North in a Changing Climate

2015· article· en· W4392548569 on OpenAlexaff
Dagomar Degroot

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Northern Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNorth Germanic languagesHistoryClimatologyLinguisticsGeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During its nadir between approximately 1565 and 1720, the Little Ice Age cooled the Arctic by 0.5° C relative to early twentieth-century averages. Historians of past climates often craft declensionist and even determinist narratives of the Little Ice Age in the far north. Conversely, social or cultural historians usually depict the early modern Arctic environment as unchanging. The journals kept by Henry Hudson and his crew during their voyages of Arctic exploration provide detailed information on environmental conditions and human responses that bridge these different historical perspectives and concerns. The journals reflect the influence of the Little Ice Age in the Arctic, but also demonstrate that voyages of northern exploration were affected by complex and even counterintuitive relationships between global climate change and its local environmental manifestations. These relationships can only be examined with a rigorous methodology that confronts issues of scale and causation that are still rarely considered by climate historians. Ultimately, the journals reveal that a shifting climate was a dynamic, but hardly determinist, agent in the early modern exploration and exploitation of the Arctic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.012
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.382
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.050 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Northern StudiesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207