Bibliographic record
Abstract
The boreal forest of Quebec/Labrador -- some of the most rugged and isolated land in Canada -- has captivated avid canoeists for generations. In the latter 19th and early 20th centuries, the intrepid A.P. Low of the Geological Survey of Canada spent, in total, more than ten years of his working life surveying the area. Employing Aboriginal canoemen and guides, he travelled by canoe, snowshoe and sailing vessel to map and document much of this vast territory. Challenged by the mystique of this extraordinary Canadian, canoeists Max Finkelstein and James Stone retraced Low's routes -- by their admission, their toughest canoe trip ever! Using archival sources, oral history and personal experience, they tell the story of A.P. Low and, in the process, reveal the environmental issues now facing this much threatened Canadian wilderness. Once again Max Finkelstein has blessed us with his incredible ability to make history of exploration come alive. Rather than sit behind a desk and try to imagine the 'misadventures' Low would have had, he goes out and duplicates them, and along the way creates a few tales of his own. This is one great read and we should be thankful that people like Max and Jim Stone exist in this world of ours.- Kevin Callan, well-known author and canoeist From A.P. Low's logs and reports, Max Finkelstein and Jim Stone give vitality to that great geological surveyor. Interspersed are vivid accounts of their own challenging canoe voyages on the same rivers and portages of the boreal forest and rock in the James Bay/Ungava/Labrador country of the Cree, Innu and Inuit. What emerges is an eloquent testimonial for the wilderness canoe trip in the Canadian experience. Bruce W. Hodgins, Emeritus Professor of History, Trent University; President, Camp Wanapitei; Member, Advisory Council, Canadian Canoe Museum
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".