MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415610275 · doi:10.1017/s0032247425100120

The United States exploring expedition (1838–1842) and the recent surfacing of J. C. Palmer’s proof copies of his epic poem <i>Antarctic Mariner’s Song</i> of 1868

2025· article· en· W4415610275 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael H. Rosove

Bibliographic record

VenuePolar Record · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPolar Research and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEPICPseudonymQuarter (Canadian coin)Presentation (obstetrics)PoetryExcursion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract James Croxall Palmer served during the United States Exploring Expedition of 1838–1842 as assistant surgeon aboard the Peacock from late February to mid-April 1839 when it sailed with the pilot boat Flying-Fish on a difficult and treacherous high-latitude foray west of the Antarctic Peninsula. The papers of the Flying-Fish were lost with the destruction of the Peacock at the mouth of the Columbia River in July 1841, thus the book Palmer authored in 1843 under the title Thulia (a pseudonym for the Flying-Fish ) became both the sole surviving firsthand account of the excursion and the first Antarctic poetry. A quarter century later, Palmer revisited, revised, and expanded Thulia , publishing it as Antarctic Mariner’s Song in 1868. Palmer’s own proof copies of Antarctic Mariner’s Song were retained by his descendants but were otherwise unknown until they recently surfaced. The proofs with Palmer’s numerous annotations contribute to the expedition’s history. A presentation and discussion constitute this report.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolar RecordSame topicPolar Research and EcologyFrench-language works237,207