Bibliographic record
Abstract
Winner of the 2025 Book of the Year Award from the George Washington American Revolution Round Table. In Defending Fort Stanwix , William L. Kidder tells the dramatic story of "the fort that never surrendered" and the crucial role it played in the American War for Independence. After a series of military defeats over the winter of 1776–1777, British military leaders developed a bold plan to gain control of the Hudson River and divide New England from the rest of the colonies. Three armies would converge on Albany: one under Lieutenant General John Burgoyne moving south from Quebec, one under General William Howe moving north from New York City, and a third under Lieutenant Colonel Barrimore St. Leger cutting east from Lake Ontario along the Mohawk River. Fort Stanwix lay directly on the path of St. Leger's force, making it a key defensive position for the Continental Army. By delaying St. Leger's troops and forcing a retreat, the garrison's stand at Fort Stanwix contributed to Burgoyne's surrender at the Battles of Saratoga a month later, a major turning point in the course of the war. Kidder offers an engaging account of life in and around the fort in the months leading up to the siege, detailing the lives of soldiers and their families, civilians, and the Haudenosaunee peoples with a focus on both the mundane aspects of military life and the courageous actions that earned distinction. Defending Fort Stanwix relates the stories of local men and women, both white and Indian, who helped with the fort's defense before, during, and after the siege and showcases an exciting, overlooked story of bravery and cooperation on New York's frontier during the American Revolution.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".