Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have considered the French contribution to the life of North America elsewhere, and have necessarily touched on the early history of Canada. There was sporadic French emigration during the middle years of the seventeenth century, but virtually none after 1675. * The population of 1750 represented several generations of native-born French, whose outlook and attitude differed from those at home. Indeed, there was considerable friction and resentment on the part of Canadians against the tepid support they received from France in their attempts to develop Canada as a French-speaking colony in the face of English expansion. The principal centres of settlement by the time Canada fell to the English at the end of the eighteenth century were three: Acadia, which covered more or less the same area as Nova Scotia; New France, the area to the north-west of the St Lawrence between Quebec and Lake Ontario, and the lands immediately to the south of Lake Erie. The struggle for Canada lasted rather more than seventy years, ending with the Treaty of Paris whereby France abandoned all her possessions on the mainland of North America. Canada was ceded to the British and Spain was given Louisiana. The acquisition of Canada presented problems to the British government, whose initial attempt to assimilate its new possession into the empire was by establishing a uniform system on the model of the older colonies.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.003 |
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".