MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6965224233 · doi:10.34944/dspace/1766

American Arctic Exploration: A Social and Cultural History, 1890-1930

2011· other· en· W6965224233 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTUScholarShare (Temple University) · 2011
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepictionArcticIndigenousPower (physics)NarrativeThe arcticNewspaperCulture of the United States

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Arctic has long held power over the American imagination as a place of otherworldly beauty, life-threatening elements, and dangerous wildlife. Nearing the end of the nineteenth century, in a time of great anxiety about the direction of American society, the region took on new significance. As a new frontier, the Arctic was a place where explorers could establish a vigorous and aggressive type of American manhood through their exploits. Publications, lectures, newspaper accounts, and other media brought the stories of these explorers to those at home. Through such accounts, the stories of brave explorers counteracted the perceived softening of men and American society in general. Women played a crucial role in this process. They challenged the perceived male-only nature of the Arctic while their depiction in publications and the press contradictorily claimed that they retained their femininity. American perceptions of the Arctic were inextricably intertwined with their perceptions of the Inuit, the indigenous peoples that called the region home. In the late-nineteenth-century, Americans generally admired the Inuit as an exceptional race that embodied characteristics that were accepted in American Society as representing ideal manhood. Over time the image of the Arctic in American society shifted from a terrifying yet conquerable place to an accessible and open place by the 1920s. This "friendly Arctic" - a term coined by anthropologist Vilhjalmur Stefansson - appeared to be a less threatening and intimidating place. Due to new technologies and geographical accomplishments, the Arctic appeared to become more accessible and useable. As the Arctic's depiction in American society gradually shifted towards a more "friendly Arctic," the role of women in the Arctic shifted as well. Women increasingly participated in this new friendly Arctic. While still claiming that their femininity remained, both fictional and non-fictional female explorers participated in a wide array of Arctic activities. The image of the Inuit, too, underwent a transformation. Americans viewed the Inuit with less respect than in prior decades. Open Arctic theories and rising technological advancements contributed to this change. The decline in respect also stemmed from beliefs that the indigenous northerners were set on a course of extinction or assimilation. Ultimately, the late-nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century relationship between Americans and the Arctic laid the foundation for present-day views of the region and the Inuit.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.138 · 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