Report of the Central board of health in return to the annexed address of the Legislative assembly, 1854.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
observation and practical acquaintance with epidemic disease is probably wanting, and to supply these places with an organized system for check- ing or modifying the effects of an epidemic such as that of this year, a permanent or more early appointed Central Board of Health, especially in cases of remote postal communication, is much required.The Central Board, however, requested the Municipal Councils of all Counties, Cities, Towns, and Villages of the Province to take means for establishing their proper Local Boards of Health, and it was hoped that about one hundred and sixty-four Local Boards may thus have been formed for the protection of the public health, and to watch the progress of the disease ; and through these channels, the Central Board of Health trusted to derive a vast amount of practical information about epidemic cholera.Copies of the code of Directions and Regulations were forwarded for all these Boards.Subsequently, when these Boards were supposed to be in existence, they were requested to give information of the date of the first case of cholera, and the daily subsequent progress of the disease in their respective localities, and tabular forms on which to base the statistics of this Board, were forwarded to them, with a request that they should be filled up and returned with a final Report.The Board has to regret that their desires have been, in this instance, but slightly complied with.In Lower Canada, upwards of three hundred Cures of country parishes were addressed bv letter, requesting them to inform the Board of the date of the first case", supposed origin, and total amount of mortality from cholera in their respective districts, and from these sources, much valua- ble information has been derived.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.086 | 0.035 |
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".