MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043893662 · doi:10.1177/0363199020938361

Childless Families in Languedoc in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries

2020· article· en· W3043893662 on OpenAlexafffund
Lucie Laumonier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family History · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChildlessnessFifteenthDemographySociologyGeographyHistoryFertilityPopulationAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Childlessness was a widespread concern for late medieval couples. In the southern French diocese of Maguelone, an average of 43 percent of fourteenth- and fifteenth-century urban testators and of 25 percent of rural testators had no children alive although they were or had been married. This article investigates, first, patterns of childlessness in time and space based on the analysis of close to 1,100 wills. In a second time, the focus shifts toward the causes of childlessness, understood as resulting from both the death of children and issues of infertility. A series of factors, some environmental, other due to the nature of sources, explain why urban couples exhibit higher rates of childlessness than rural couples. The last section of this article explores the consequences of the absence of children on the transmission of estates and on support for the elderly.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family HistorySame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207