Founding of the Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical College, 1890-1908
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis is an examination of the founding and historical development of certain selected aspects of the Oklahoma Agricult'l,lral and Mechanical College from 1890 to 1908.The maturat:i,.on o:I; the institution --which is now one of the leading land-grant universities in the United States--has long been of concern.This interest has resulted throtlgh the years in the collection of an extensive number of documents and memoirs, both published and unpublished, arid the steady production of short articles and specialized studies for the consumption of the general public.To date, however, the task of organizing known information and integrating it with new data has not been undertaken.It is hoped that the following narrative will accomplish this objective for the specified time period and provide a formula by which the remainder of the history may be compiled at some future date.The particular time span of the project was chosen for several reasons.First, since the college was established in 1890, in spite of the fact that classes were not convened for nearly a year aft;erwa:i:-d, it seemed logical to record the political activity that led to the actual creation of the institution, In addition, the selection of the first board of regents, president, and fac\llty, as well as the almost futile effort to locate qualified students, also occurred in the time that elapsed between the chartering of the college and the beginning of classroom work.Secondly, it will be immediately obvious to students of local history that these eighteen years nearly correspond to the time Oklahoma ii.i Farewe 11 • • • • • • •. • • • ., • 269 Conclusion .• • • • 273 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . .
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.003 |
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".