MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1662983572

A Friend in Need or a Business Indeed?: Disabled Bodies and Fraternalism in Victorian Ontario

2010· article· en· W1662983572 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dustin Galer

Bibliographic record

VenueProject Muse (Johns Hopkins University) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the period of early capitalism in Ontario, disabled workers were forced to find ways to survive following an injury. Affordable insurance offered by fraternal societies provided limited protection for many working-class fam-ilies but was not a reliable source of financial support for injured and disabled workers. Even when insurance disability benefits were a factor, many injured workers soon found themselves in a position of financial hardship. Fraternal insurance reflected many of the same barriers facing disabled workers and as a result, represents a microcosm of wider social and institutional treatment of individuals with disabilities during this period. Durant la periode du debut du capitalisme en Ontario, les travailleurs handicapes etaient obliges de trouver des moyens de survivre par suite d’une blessure. L’assurance abordable offerte par les societes fraternelles donnait de la protection limitee pour de nombreuses familles de classe ouvriere mais n’etait pas une source fiable d’appui financier pour les travailleurs blesses ou handicapes. Meme si les prestations d’assurance invalidite etaient en jeu, de nombreux travailleurs blesses se sont vite trouves dans une position de difficulte financiere. L’assurance fraternelle a revele les memes barrieres nombreuses faisant face aux travailleurs handicapes et en consequence, represente un microcosme du traitement social et institutionnel plus large des personnes frappees d’incapacite pendant cette periode.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0150.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProject Muse (Johns Hopkins University)Same topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207