Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article discusses the harnessing of Niagara Falls for its power use. The article begins discussing 1889 when the "Cataract Construction Company, an American corporation, whereof Mr. William B. Rankine, of New York, was the leading spirit, and had associated with him such men of money and brains as Francis Lynde Stetson, J. Pierpont Morgan, D. O. Mills, Morris K. Jessup, W. K. Vanderbilt and John Jacob Astor." The author then discusses the development of other companies, "while the Canadian Niagara Power Company is the first in the field it is by no means alone on the Ontario bank for two other companies, viz., the Ontario Power Company and the Toronto and Niagara Power Company are hard at work getting into shape for business. Of these the first names is a purely American concern, and the second a purely Canadian one, Mr. William Mackenzie, of Mackenzie & Mann, Colonel Pellatt, and Mr. Frederic Nicholls being the leading spirits. The Ontario Power Company first proposed to build an open canal from the Welland River, above Chippewa, to a point near Queen Victoria Park, and thence conduct the water in pipes laid underground to their power-house, which is to situated at the foot of the cliff, not far below Table Rock, the used water then falling into the river directly without any tail-race tunnel being required. The company intends to develop, at least, 100,000 horse-power, but its works can hardly be complete for a couple of years yet. Finally there is the Toronto and Niagara Power Company, whose intake and power-house will be upon the same spot at a location about half-way between the intakes of the other two companies, while the tunnel to carry off the used water will be cut through the rock under the bed of the river until it comes out at a point somewhere beneath the Horse-Shoe Falls themselves".
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".