MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004904507 · doi:10.1080/03071022.2020.1694772

Sanctioned and illicit support networks at the margins of a Scottish town in the early seventeenth century

2020· article· en· W3004904507 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial History · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReputationPillarSmall townPolitical scienceDisciplinePoor reliefCriminologyLawPublic administrationSociologySocioeconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines women’s participation in support networks, both sanctioned and illicit, in the Scottish town of Canongate in the early seventeenth century. Canongate’s official system of poor relief, controlled by the local church court, was a central pillar of support for the town’s poor. It was responsive and well organized, but it hinged on both the need of the poor relief recipients and their maintenance of a good reputation in the town. Women without a passable public reputation were still able to find support, however, as the Canongate church disciplinary court records attest. These records reveal extensive informal and illicit support networks of townspeople harbouring ‘scandalous persons’, networks that both supplemented and contested the sanctioned support system. This article explores the relationship between these systems of poor relief and harbouring and demonstrates that women at the economic and moral margins of the town participated in a dense and vibrant network of support.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.160 · 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