MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

In Defence of the Protestant Religion

2021· book-chapter· en· W3204744449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brad A. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueCornell University Press eBooks · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtestantismBritishnessParliamentLawSpanish Civil WarPolitical scienceAllianceLegislationSeditionGovernment (linguistics)Politics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter addresses the Gordon Riots, which revealed a shocking reality: British Protestants had died fighting against their government's attempt to relieve Catholics while their nation was at war with France and Spain. In May of 1778, as Britons rallied to the flag on news of the Franco-American alliance, Parliament passed the English Catholic Relief Act, and proposed similar bills for both Scotland and Ireland. The legislation repealed several longstanding penal laws against Catholic subjects so that they could fight in the expanded war. Like the American response to the Quebec Act four years earlier, the passage of pro-Catholic legislation (especially while the nation was at war with France) convinced many Britons that their government was conspiring to topple the Protestant nation they now so desperately sought to defend. This new war led to new explanations of loyalty and Britishness. Britons continued to depend on traditional fears of Catholic tyranny to make sense of the war, but they also expressed a greater commitment to popular understandings of Protestant Whig liberty.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.226
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCornell University Press eBooksSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207