MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226146320 · doi:10.1093/pastj/gtac013

Chris Wickham on ‘The Economic Logic of Medieval Societies’: A Response

2022· article· en· W4226146320 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

VenuePast & Present · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeudalismSubsistence agricultureCapitalismPeasantPeriod (music)ReproductionNeoclassical economicsEconomicsSubsistence economyArgument (complex analysis)EconomyHistoryEconomic systemSociologyAgriculturePolitical sciencePhilosophyLawPoliticsArchaeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Chris Wickham’s theory regarding the feudal economy is predicated on the continuing existence and numerical majority of peasant producers with direct access to their means of subsistence. While his theory holds good for the period up to c.1200, after that point, the numbers of those without direct access to their full means of subsistence increased so much that their impact on the economy has to be considered in any explanatory model. Furthermore, subsistence needs to be understood not only as what is needed for biological survival, but also what is needed for social survival and reproduction. Because of the extent of market demand and dependence in the period after c.1200, the economic logic of societies in core regions during this period does not accord well with the model Wickham proposes. It is also, however, not to be understood as capitalist, proto-capitalist, or necessarily leading towards capitalism. This period needs to be understood on its own terms as neither feudal nor capitalist.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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 score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0030.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.235
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