MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096655262

To the Pacific Northwest in 1810

2015· article· en· W7096655262 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital literacy in education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPacific oceanFur tradeSound (geography)Oral historyRest (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“When the party encountered the Snake River, they abandoned their horses and attempted to travel downstream. After nine days of successful travel they lost a man and two canoes in the rapids, and reconsidered their plan. They divided into four parties, and took different routes to approach the mouth of the Columbia. ” “They found hard times on the Snake River in southern Idaho, where they lost some goods and most of their food, and were forced to cache the rest of their trade goods and divided into fractions to make their way to the Columbia. Most members of the party reached Fort Astoria in January and February 1812. ” When they reached the mouth of the Columbia River in February 1812 they joined the portion of the expedition that had traveled by sea at Fort Astoria (near Astoria, Oregon). The trip from Missouri to Astoria took 340 days. “According to his own account, Hunt traveled 2,073 miles from a village of the Aricaras, in South Dakota to the end of the journey. From Catholic Church Records of the Pacific Northwest, Vancouver I & II, Warner & Munnick, French Prairie Press, 1972; Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (John Jacob Astor, who owned the American Fur Company started the Pacific Fur Company in New York City. Astor planned to settle at the

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.011

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital literacy in educationFrench-language works237,207