MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7126968693

Beacons of Liberty: International Free Soil and the Fight for Racial Justice in Antebellum America

2023· article· en· W7126968693 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elliott Drago

Bibliographic record

VenueIndiana Magazine of History (Indiana University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonialism, slavery, and trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmancipationBeaconEconomic JusticePower (physics)Black PowerInternational relations
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Beacons of Liberty: International Free Soil and the Fight for Racial Justice in Antebellum America, Elena K. Abbott examines the “individual and collective influence” that international free-soil havens had on American antislavery activists between 1813 and 1863 (p. 4). In countries like Mexico, Cuba, and especially Canada, international free-soil havens offered free and self-emancipated Black Americans the opportunity to enjoy equal standing outside of the United States. Abbot argues that Black Americans identified “specific attributes that they believed made free soil ‘free,’” thus contributing to the discourse of emancipation inthe United States (p. 8). Tracing this discourse through traditional physical archives and online databases, she recognizes the power and limitation of the latter while making sure not to supplant the former. By the end of her work, she concludes that international free-soil havens gave Black Americans, and therefore the antislavery movement, “physical and conceptual alternatives to the prevailing pro-slavery polities of the United States” (p. 234).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0160.023
Scholarly communication0.0120.010
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndiana Magazine of History (Indiana University)Same topicColonialism, slavery, and tradeFrench-language works237,207