MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981273993 · doi:10.26882/histagrar.079e01m

Building an annual series of English wheat production in an intriguing era (1645-1761): methodology, challenges and results

2019· article· en· W2981273993 on OpenAlexfundno aff
José Luis Martínez-González, Gabriel Jover Avellà, Enric Tello

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoria Agraria Revista de agricultura e historia rural · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversitat de Barcelona
KeywordsEconomicsProbateAgricultureAgricultural economicsProduction (economics)Consumption (sociology)EconometricsMacroeconomicsGeographyLawSocial sciencePolitical scienceSociologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a method for estimating an annual series of English wheat production in physical units during the intriguing period of 1645-1761, when the English Agricultural Revolution began. It is based on Davenant’s Law and the assumption of a decrease in long-term crop variability, taking into account the yields obtained from probate inventories and farm accounts. The exercise confirms the idea that the King-Davenant accounting of the inverse variation of prices and quantities through price elasticity was indeed a common rule at that time, whereas income elasticity did not become a decisive factor until the mid-18th century. From then on it gained momentum, as can be observed by lengthening the series until 1884. The new series of English wheat production presented here also shows that, from a physical and environmental perspective, the Agricultural Revolution began before 1750 and resumed after 1800. The results are consistent with recent estimates of agricultural GDP put forward in the literature on English economic history.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.195 · 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
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoria Agraria Revista de agricultura e historia ruralSame topicHistorical Economic and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207