MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753851605 · doi:10.1162/tneq_a_00623

The Bishop Controversy, the Imperial Crisis, and Religious Radicalism in New England, 1763-74: By arrangement with the Colonial Society of Massachusetts the Editors of the New England Quarterly are pleased to publish the winning essay of the 2016 <i>Walter Muir Whitehill Prize in Early American History</i>

2017· article· en· W2753851605 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter W. Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe New England Quarterly · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHenan Institute of Science and Technology
KeywordsPolitical radicalismTolerationNew englandEmpireColonialismPolitical scienceLawGovernment (linguistics)HistoryEconomic historyReligious studiesPolitical economySociologyPhilosophyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay re-examines the “bishop controversy”, a dispute between Anglicans and Dissenters in the decade preceding the American Revolution. The controversy, it argues, was part of the imperial crisis caused by the Seven Years' War and the government's toleration of French Catholics in Quebec. This perspective highlights the Church of England's limited role in the empire and the unacknowledged radicalism of loyalist Anglicans.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.225 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe New England QuarterlySame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207