MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006313030 · doi:10.1215/10829636-2338599

Stranger Artisans and the London Sanctuary of St. Martin le Grand in the Reign of Henry VIII

2013· article· en· W2006313030 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon McSheffrey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReignImmigrationPoliticsLawSociologyPrivilege (computing)HistoryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

St. Martin le Grand, a precinct within the walls of London, was both a sanctuary and a liberty: it offered asylum to accused felons, and it allowed immigrant craftsmen to work and sell within its bounds despite London’s strict restrictions on alien labor. St. Martin’s privileges had long rankled civic governors and guilds, sparking a series of legal and political skirmishes between the City and St. Martin’s in the 1520s and 1530s. This article examines St. Martin’s community of Dutch and French immigrants, who constituted the densest concentration of aliens in the metropolitan area. Living cheek by jowl with felonious sanctuary seekers, the strangers came to share both a conceptual and a physical space with the felons who sought St. Martin’s sanctuary privilege. In the reign of Henry VIII, the control of labor and retailing came to be tightly imbricated with the larger issues surrounding crime, mercy, and punishment that sanctuary inspired.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

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 studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medieval and Early Modern StudiesSame topicHistorical Economic and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207