MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403084014 · doi:10.1177/08438714241272506

Stories of resistance and resilience: The role of the port city of Calicut in the seventeenth-century Indian Ocean trade

2024· article· en· W4403084014 on OpenAlex
Archa Neelakandan Girija

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Maritime History · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Maritime and Colonial Histories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPort (circuit theory)Resistance (ecology)Resilience (materials science)Indian oceanOceanographyPsychological resilienceHistoryBiologyGeologyEcologyEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Dutch East India Company attempted to control the pepper trade in the seventeenth-century Indian Ocean trade. Attempting to control pepper-growing areas such as the Malabar Coast (south-western coast of India) was part of this plan. Calicut was an important port city in Malabar and a vital player in the Indian Ocean trade. Unlike many port cities that were controlled by the European companies, the rulers and merchants of Calicut attempted to sustain a free trading port on their own instead of accepting a European company monopoly. In short, Calicut offered an alternative emporium for Indian Ocean trade in Malabar by resisting imperial endeavours. This article explores the ways in which Calicut participated in the Indian Ocean pepper trade despite the Dutch attempts to control it.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.250 · 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