MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025203363 · doi:10.1080/1354571x.2011.530760

Forced residence in liberal Italy: a pre-history, 1815–65

2011· article· en· W2025203363 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Modern Italian Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEuropean Political History Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidenceLawAppealInstitutionStatutePoliticsPolitical scienceBlueprintTolerationDeportationSociologyUnitary stateImmigration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article analyzes the origins of domicilio coatto (forced residence), a system of police-administered deportation implemented by the liberal government in 1863. Initially an expedient for defusing the post-unitary crisis in the south, domicilio coatto evolved soon after into a permanent institution of preventative policing in liberal Italy; it would also serve as an important blueprint for Mussolini's confino di polizia. Focusing on the legal ancestry of domicilio coatto and the juridical mentalities of its framers, this article seeks to explain how and why liberal legal experts devised and endorsed such an illiberal institution. It begins by identifying the origins of forced residence in a wide range of pre-unitary penal and police statutes. Throughout, it argues that domicilio coatto was conceived not simply as a means of repressing political opponents in the Mezzogiorno but more importantly as an aggressive approach to preventing common crime. In so doing, it challenges previous assumptions about the beginnings, aims and appeal of forced residence in the constitutional monarchy.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.123 · 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