MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2472113118 · doi:10.1057/9780230618541_3

The Prussian Settlement Commission and Its Activities in the Land Market, 1886–1918

2009· book-chapter· en· W2472113118 on OpenAlexaff
Scott M. Eddie

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Maritime and Colonial Histories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlement (finance)CommissionPoliticsPopulationGovernment (linguistics)ColonizationGeographyEmpirePolitical scienceHuman settlementEconomyHistoryDevelopment economicsEconomic historyPolitical economyArchaeologyLawSociologyEconomicsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I nner colonization, as is clear from the chapters in this volume, can take many forms. The farther back one goes in history, the more likely it is that the colonization effort was directed at populating empty lands. This was the case, for example, in the efforts of the Habsburgs to attract settlers to the Southeastern areas of their Empire in the eighteenth century, after expulsion of the Turks. Even schemes in modern times, such as Nikita Khrushchev’s virgin lands scheme in the Soviet Union, or the settlement schemes in Sri Lanka in the 1960s, were primarily aimed at bringing new land, or underused land, into cultivation. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, however, there existed an official government settlement scheme that was unusual in that it was directly aimed at changing the ethnic balance of population in an already settled region, 1 and undertaken primarily for political, rather than economic, ends. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooksSame topicGlobal Maritime and Colonial HistoriesFrench-language works237,207