A refutation of the letter to an Hon. Brigadier-General, Commander of His Majesty's forces in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
< Difficulties, I confult the canonical Crl- * ticifms of a certain right Reverend ; and * in my polite Mifadventures, the Phyfician ' of Ludgate-hill is my celer atque Jidelisy * fecret aiidjpecdy."A Perfon who fhould act as here propofed, might, without ftrain- ing matters in the leaft, be charitably fuppof- ed not to enjoy a thorough Sanity of Mind.What follows, contains more of a Compli- ment than a Sneer, when duly confidered, although undoubtedly it was intended forthe latter : ' To whom therefore fhall I appeal * in any military Doubts, but to the Man, * whom Fortune, that never-erring Judge * of Merit, in one (hort Campaign made a * Colonel, a General, and a Commander 'in Chief?' The Writer, whom we fuppofe not to be an unletter'd Man, mufl doubtlefs have read or heard of the great Roman^who from read- ing, and private Application alone, difplay'd at his firft Appearance in the Field, all the Abilities of a moft confummate General -, and ] and without having had even the Experi- ence of one fliort Campaign to make hi.n fo.The Infinuation in Page 2, relative to the Title of Brigadier-General is puerile and mean, and the Tack to it abfolutely falfe, ' although he might prudently chufe ' to ftay at Home, when he received it,' (the Title.)A Man muft have a Fore- head unufually embronzed, to be able to let flip fuch an Untruth.Not only the noble Officer's Friends, but the Public in general were of Opinion, that * he might prudently chufe to ftay at ' Home,' confidering his high Pretenfions by Birth, as well as Family-endearing Ties, in QuaUty of a Hufband and a Father.Let it be remembered, that he had a Brother in the fame diftant and difagrceable Service, who fell in the Field fighting for his Country.Surely then, a Family that thus devotes itfclf to the Service of the public B 2 Weal, r 4 ] Weal, in the Senate and the Field, deferves our warmeft Thanks j and all Attempts to milreprefent and vilify fuch extraordinary Deferts, mufl: excite Indignation in the Bofom of every honeft Man, every Lover of our Conftitution, and of true Britifi Glory.This abufive Writer's Phrafeology is fo wildly fcattered, and digreffionary, that it is but feldom one can grapple w^ith any Thing like a Meaning.As often, however, as an Occafion for Animadverfion may pre- fent itfelf, itiliall not be let to efcape ; for it is refolved to trace him through all the Meandrings of his not very coherent Brain.* merly entered your Proteft againft attack- ' ing the Place, you alone enjoyed the Ho-' nour of its being taking ;' muft not every Reader be hereby induced to think, that this traduced Commander had protefted againft
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 0.019 |
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".