MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Historiography of the English State during ‘the Long Eighteenth Century’: Part I – Decentralized Perspectives

2009· article· en· W2084337801 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

VenueHistory Compass · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersState Government of Victoria
KeywordsHistoriographyExpansiveState (computer science)PoliticsHistoryWork (physics)State formationSociologyPolitical economyAestheticsPolitical scienceLawEngineeringArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article reviews the four most prominent themes in the historiography of the modern English state during the last six decades, with a particular focus on ‘the long eighteenth century’ (1660–1837). The first is the vision of an expansive and centralized administrative state in Victorian England most famously set forth in the work of the late Oliver MacDonagh. Second is the notion of the state as an information‐gathering entity that has recently been forcefully stated by Edward Higgs. Third is the vision of an unexpectedly powerful, substantially centralized ‘fiscal‐military’ state during the eighteenth century, powerfully evoked in the work of John Brewer. Finally, a brief overview is given of the prodigious historical literature that has arisen in recent years surrounding the notion of the state as abstract entity capable of commanding the loyalties of those people over whom it rules. The article concludes by suggesting how a more fully integrated vision of the English state in history might be achieved through a deeper, more dynamic interrelation of changing political‐administrative structures and shifting social‐cultural forces.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.600
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.164 · 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