MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Poor relief, labourers’ households and living standards in rural England c.1770–1834: a Bedfordshire case study<sup>1</sup>

2005· article· en· W3121731252 on OpenAlex
Samantha Williams

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

VenueThe Economic History Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoor reliefStandard of livingIndustrialisationPoor lawWelfarePaymentEconomicsSouth eastSocioeconomicsGeographyDemographic economicsEconomic growthAgricultural economicsPolitical sciencePovertyLawMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article estimates the contribution of poor relief to the household economies of the labouring poor in the two case‐study communities of Campton and Shefford, east Bedfordshire, and thereby throws further light on the standard of living of workers during industrialization in the south and east. Utilizing the technique of nominal record linkage between poor law sources and family reconstitution for the period c.1770—c.1834, the article charts the growth in social welfare and estimates the proportion of inhabitants benefiting from regular relief payments, the changing family circumstances of recipients, and the proportion of total income made up by poor relief.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.644
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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.205 · 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