MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610449572

Mennonite Colonization in Mexico and the Pendulum of Modernization, 1920-2013

2014· review· en· W2610449572 on OpenAlex
Jason Dormady

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarWorks (Central Washington University) · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsState (computer science)Settlement (finance)Political scienceModernization theoryLawPoliticsEconomic historyHistoryEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1921, the settlement of Canadian Old Colony Mennonites in the northern Mexican state of Chihuahua served as a tool for reconstructing the region's agricultural economy following the devastating Revolution of 1910. In exchange for their colonization and investment in Mexico, Mennonites received guarantees that exempted them from Mexican land, education, health, and military laws. By the 1980s, however, Mexico undertook constitutional and economic reforms that rendered Old Colony exemptions from law obsolete and their agricultural model a relic of the past. While some Mennonites chose to flee for other locations in Latin America, others remained to face the challenges of security concerns and climate change. In the twenty-first century, these challenges are driving innovative apiculture and community negotiation that are returning Mennonites to their earlier position as paragons of economic progress in northern Mexico.

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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.192 · 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