MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1502216453

Creating a Modern Countryside: Liberalism and Land Resettlement in British Columbia

2007· book· en· W1502216453 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James Murton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiberalismPoliticsVictoryGovernment (linguistics)State (computer science)Liberal PartyPolitical economyPolitical scienceRural areaEconomic historySociologyLawHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Creating a Modern Countryside, James Murton disentangles the political shift from nineteenth-century classical liberalism to a more modern twentieth-century statist liberal model. To do this, he examines several land resettlement schemes in British Columbia, arguing that the state manipulated the land to achieve certain social and political ends. Although most of the plans went awry, Murton insists that they say much about the evolving British Columbian and Canadian political economy of the early twentieth century. The result is a substantial and complex environmental history monograph about an overlooked political transformation. The programs to resettle thousands of would-be farmers in British Columbia represented a clear victory for the “new liberals” over an older liberal paradigm that had been established in the early nineteenth century. The new variant deemphasized the centrality of the individual, as it engendered a more activist state in hopes of improving the general welfare. In British Columbia, this trend was expressed in how the land was manipulated. With scientific experts leading the way, the provincial government used nature to “create” more land in marginal agricultural areas

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0190.012
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations19
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207