Bibliographic record
Abstract
The issue of material support for the missionary activities of the Society of Jesus in New France remained one of the most painful throughout its history of the XVII-XVIII centuries. According to many researchers, it was the financial and economic activities of the order in the missionary territories that served as one of the main reasons (and reasons) for its prohibition in the second half of the XVIII century. During the previous century, especially the first half of it, most of the difficulties and problems faced by Jesuit missionaries in Canada were caused by insufficient, or even completely absent, material base of their activities. The participation of Jesuit missionaries in North America in the fur trade has been the subject of intense debate since their appearance in New France and up to the present day. It seems that the representatives of the order were indeed involved in the fur trade, which was caused by the need for material support for their main, missionary, activities. Throughout the period under review, furs continued to be, first of all, the main monetary equivalent in the colony, along with gifts of various kinds, and in this form were used by Jesuit missionaries, as well as by other persons and organizations on its territory and even more so beyond its borders, in the native environment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".