MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2533185862 · doi:10.1080/1081602x.2016.1224726

Precariousness or prosperity? The diverse faces of widowhood in rural Buenos Aires during the nineteenth century

2016· article· en· W2533185862 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Claudia Contente

Bibliographic record

VenueThe History of the Family · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRyerson UniversityUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsProsperityInheritance (genetic algorithm)Rural areaPeriod (music)SociologyEconomic growthEthnologyDevelopment economicsPolitical scienceHistorySocioeconomicsGeographyEconomic historyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, I will explore the resources and capacities women could mobilize in the countryside of Buenos Aires at the beginning of the nineteenth century when they had to confront the domestic crisis triggered by their husbands’ death. It is of course essential to study the foreseeable options (taking over the helm of the family farm, seeking refuge with relatives, or quickly remarrying) they had and the role played by what are commonly considered as crucial resources (family composition, patrimony, and networks). This study nevertheless seeks to identify other factors (notably the legal framework, patterns of colonization, and widows’ own know-how and experiences as farmers and settlers) that bring to light the specificity of widowhood in rural Buenos Aires during this period. As a consequence, the juridical aspects of inheritance proceedings and the concrete practices they reveal will be analyzed before I examine the wide social spectrum (namely the inhabitants of San Antonio de Areco, La Matanza, Quilmes, and San Vicente, four areas of rural Buenos Aires) registered by the censuses of 1813 and 1815.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.159 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe History of the FamilySame topicHistorical Economic and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207