MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6982697949

John Andrew Jackson: Enslaved Resistance, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, and the Downfall of American Chattel Slavery

2021· article· en· W6982697949 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueHollins Digital Commons (Hollins University) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonialism, slavery, and trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)ParallelsMiddle PassageSouth carolinaHead (geology)New england
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

John Andrew Jackson was a former slave who lived in the early-to-middle nineteenth century. After escaping slavery in South Carolina and making his way north to Massachusetts, Jackson was forced to head to Canada after the passing of the Fugitive Slave Act. Jackson lectured about his experiences as a slave after he travelled to England and he eventually returned to South Carolina after the Civil War, to the place where he was enslaved, where he worked to improve the lives of other former slaves. During his journey to Canada Jackson met Harriet Beecher Stowe, who housed Jackson and helped him escape the United States. Jackson was likely the first slave Stowe housed and Jackson describes their interaction in his memoir, The Experience of a Slave in South Carolina. Jackson told Stowe his story, and many of the events and themes Jackson spoke of in his memoir—and likely told Stowe about—have parallels to Uncle Tom’s Cabin, one of the most influential books in American History. Who was John Andrew Jackson, and what do his life and experiences reveal about American slavery and the historical context in which he lived? In this paper I will argue that Jackson provides a specific example of how enslaved African Americans, their activism, narratives, and resistance, were critical in the creation of the circumstances leading to the downfall of chattel slavery in America.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHollins Digital Commons (Hollins University)Same topicColonialism, slavery, and tradeFrench-language works237,207