Bibliographic record
Abstract
“So, you say Theodore is willing to become a Protestant to marry you, Fanny; but have you, my dear, considered of it well?” “I have indeed, mother,” answered Fanny. “And will you consent to marry a man that will change his religion for a mistress? If he does change, think how little devotion he can have at bottom; and where there is no religion, there is seldom virtue, and consequently no happiness.” Regina Maria Roche, “Hold your Religion Sacred” in London Tales In the nineteenth century, the British Empire relied extensively on religion as a disciplinary mechanism in both the literal and the Foucauldian senses. In the literal sense of discipline, religious groups outside the Anglican or Christian fold were penalized in material terms, through incarceration and fines as well as a range of other punitive measures. In Ireland before 1829, for instance, Catholics could not hold political office or become lawyers, and various laws conspired to undermine their landholdings. In the Foucauldian sense of the term, those who were within the dominant religious fold were largely assumed to have internalized, along with their faith, a range of secular beliefs, including political values consistent with British hegemony. As R. Gregory Van Dussen notes of proselytization efforts in Ireland at this time, “Religious conversion, in other words, could be expected to produce political loyalty to the colonial regime. One is implied by the other, not through any theological necessity, but through the inner logic of imperial Protestantism.”
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".