MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6983356901

Measuring Ground: Surveyors and the Properties of States in the Great Lakes Region, 1783-1840

2024· dissertation· en· W6983356901 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurveyorProperty (philosophy)IndigenousState (computer science)CertaintyLegitimacyReal propertyTrespassOrder (exchange)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Between the end of the America Revolution and the middle of the nineteenth century, surveyors materialized landed property and settler states in the Great Lakes region. At the end of the eighteenth century, British and American officials faced a similar dilemma: both aimed to transform Indigenous homelands across the region into property for settlers. Yet neither initially possessed either the capacity or legitimacy to achieve this end. This dissertation is the first in-depth study of the two offices that eventually fulfilled this objective: the Surveyor General’s Office for the colony of Upper Canada and the Surveyor General’s Office responsible for the American Territory of Michigan. Contests over boundaries materialized by surveyors’ fieldwork and paperwork not only stressed the material foundations of state and property formation but complicate understandings of property as an abstract bundle of rights. Crown officials for Upper Canada and their federal counterparts for the Territory of Michigan recognized that the security of property and the authority of the state hinged on the certainty of survey boundaries. It required a standard that mathematics could not supply. Efforts to provide that certainty thus required each state to pass regulations that determined how surveyors measured land and how each office organized its documentary archive. It also required surveyors to solicit support from local elites, ordinary settlers, and even Indigenous nations, a dynamic most visible when surveyors adjusted disputed boundaries through collective agreement. This dissertation argues that the shape of the state and the nature of property turned on the spatial order generated surveyors’ during this period. It finds striking parallels between the federal and Upper Canadian states’ reliance on surveys to territorialize jurisdiction, administer land markets, and ensure public order, especially amidst major demographic shifts after the War of 1812. By the late 1830s, after Michigan had become a state and rebellion rocked Upper Canada, the authority of Crown and federal surveyors in this process began to diminish. Courts increasingly came to settle boundary disputes, a shift that made it possible to see property as increasingly untethered from surveyors’ infrastructure of maps and markers. Surveyors changed the Great Lakes region, only to change in turn.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→