Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article focuses on the Jesuit missions into Elizabethan England and the Jesuit relationship with the Catholic gentry and why the gentry were crucial to Jesuit mission’s survival. This is done by looking at the various ways that the gentry class were involved with and supported the Jesuit’s efforts. Gentry homes were an important aspect of gentry support because of their multi-purpose functions in hiding the priests from state authorities, their ideal place for planning operations and for holding mass because of their hidden countryside location. The gentry class were also personally involved, aiding the Jesuits through their actions as escorts as well as running illegal printing presses and distributing catholic propaganda around England. They also served as a vital connection for the Jesuits to the laymen people and resulted in the development of local catholic communities structured around the gentry class which supported the Jesuit of goal of sustaining Catholic communities. While this shows how the gentry were important to the Jesuits, it also demonstrates how the Jesuit’s became increasingly reliant on the gentry class which opens up additional avenues of research into how their relationship evolved during the reign of King James I.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.372 | 0.210 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".