MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394701251 · doi:10.25071/k6qcpm43

The politics of proclamation, the politics of commemoration

2013· article· en· W4394701251 on OpenAlexaffabout
Thomas Peace

Bibliographic record

VenueCanada Watch · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProclamationPoliticsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EditoRial the politics of proclamation, the politics of commemoration O ctober 7, 2013 marks the 250th year since King George III issued what is, for Canadians, the Crown's most famous Royal Proclamation.Over the 17th and 18th centuries, the English monarch released over a hundred royal proclamations.Some of these procla mations declared war (usually against France), others-such as the Royal Proc lamation of October 23, 1759-mandated public thanksgiving and celebration, while others focused on more local laws (lotteries in Virginia in 1621, pro hibiting trade in Hudson's Bay in 1688, establishing a post office in 1711, and mandating "fast days" in England dur ing the American Revolution).Few of these proclamations, however, carry the historical legacy of the one issued in October 1763.an oUtlinE of thE 1763 RoYal PRoClamation Known by some as First Nations peo ple's or Canada's Magna Carta, the 1763 Royal Proclamation laid a framework for British behaviour and law in North America following France's defeat in the Seven Years' War.The Proclamation performed three functions.First, it estab lished the boundaries and governance structures for four newly acquired col onies: Quebec, East and West Florida, and Grenada.It also annexed Île Saint Jean (Prince Edward Island) and Cape

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0200.026
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.165 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanada WatchSame topicHistorical and Contemporary Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207