MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081039666 · doi:10.7202/031015ar

Working-Class Standards of Living in Late-Victorian Urban Ontario: A Review of the Miscellaneous Evidence on the Quality of Material Life

2006· review· en· W2081039666 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
David Gagan, Rosemary R. Gagan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Historical Association · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandard of livingIndustrialisationConsumption (sociology)UrbanizationGovernment (linguistics)Great DepressionSocial classEconomicsWorking classEconomic growthDevelopment economicsPolitical scienceSociologySocial scienceMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Owing to the lack of long series of data pertaining to wages and retail prices, the analysis of standards of living in late-Victorian Ontario presents unusually difficult problems for the social historian. Following the model adopted by the participants in the earlier British standard-of-living debate, this study attempts to mitigate those difficulties, to some extent, by examining a wide range of miscellaneous sociological and economic evidence generated by government agencies, usually for other purposes. A review of the data pertaining to employment, wages, savings, consumption, the accumulation of real wealth, public health and social pathology in urban Ontario between 1875 and 1900 suggests that the 1880s was a decade of rising expectations in terms of employment, consumption, savings and the distribution of wealth following the social and economic upheaval associated with the depression of the late 1870s. However, the evidence also suggests that the marginal gains made in working-class standards of living in the 1880s were largely compromised in the 1890s as the environmental effects of industrialization and urbanization began to be experienced in full measure.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Historical AssociationSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207