Tenant-farmer delegates' visit to Canada in 1890 and their reports upon the agricultural resources of the provinces of Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, the North-west Territories, and British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"On cover: Canada in 1890; the reports of the tenant farmers' delegates. Contains the reports of eleven men connected with agriculture in the United Kingdom. The reports describe the agricultural resources in Canada and the advantages the country offers for the settlement of farmers, farm labourers, and others of the working class. Each report deals with the various provinces visited by the particular delegate. The Preface states that the reports were also issued in four parts for general circulation. Parts 1 and 2 were intended for distribution in England; Part 3 in Scotland, and Part 4 in Ireland. Part 1 contains the reports of William Edwards, G. Hutchinson, William Scotson, and J. T. Wood; Part 2, those of Arthur Daniel, Francis Fane, Robert Pitt, and H. Simmons; Part 3, those of George Brown, and John Speir; and Part 4, those of Major Stevenson, and George Brown. A small number of Major Stevenson's reports were printed in a separate pamphlet numbered IV A." The Canadian edition was published under title: Tenant-farmer delegates' visit to Canada in 1890 . .. (Ottawa, Printed by S. E. Dawson, 1892). In 230 pages." -- Lowther, B. J., & Laing, M. (1968). A bibliography of British Columbia: Laying the foundations, 1849-1899. Victoria, BC: University of Victoria, p. 102. "Published by order of the Parliament of Canada. (Canadian edition.)" -- Title page.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.112 | 0.017 |
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".