MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588366511

“Organisations for brotherly aid in misfortune”: Beveridge and the friendly societies

2011· book-chapter· en· W1588366511 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Weinbren

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Research Online (The Open University) · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoluntary sectorMisfortuneContext (archaeology)PoliticsVoluntary actionAction (physics)Social capitalCivil societyVoluntary associationCapital (architecture)Political scienceSociologyPolitical economyPublic administrationSocial scienceLawHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between the state and the voluntary sector has changed significantly since 1948 when Beveridge’s major report, Voluntary Action, was first published. Sixty years later, a group of historians analyse and reassess the impact of Beveridge’s ideas about voluntary action for social advance in this timely volume. Using examples from the UK, Australasia and Canada, this book clearly articulates the importance and significance of Beveridge's ideas on voluntary action within an international context. \n \nWith the emphasis of governments on the importance of the voluntary or 'third sector' and the development of policies and practices to enhance social capital, build civil society and engage communities, this book will be invaluable for those interested in how the third sector has evolved over time. It will be of interest to historians, social policy researchers, political theorists, economists and educationalists.

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)0.005
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.212
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Research Online (The Open University)Same topicNonprofit Sector and VolunteeringFrench-language works237,207