Bibliographic record
Abstract
In late November 1569, Elizabeth Watson went to mass at Durham, something she had not been able to do for over a decade. Soon after Queen Elizabeth had come to the English throne in 1558, Protestant services had replaced the Catholic mass only just recently reinstated by Queen Mary, after a turbulent few decades of religious change first begun by King Henry VIII. We tend to remember Queen Elizabeth as “Gloriana,” the Virgin Queen who steered England safely and successfully through the shoals of the sixteenth-century reformation; Elizabeth Watson and her ilk we tend to remember rarely at all. Watson does not seem to have previously offered any overt resistance to the changes around her. But now in the north, a rebellion had begun in the name of the old faith and Watson, like many others, seized the opportunity to attend a Catholic service. In fact, so many people attended that she could not fight her way through the throng and had to sit at the edge of the crowd to say her rosary. Of course, not all welcomed the rebellion and its changes: Watson encountered one disconsolate Protestant woman, to whom she dismissively sneered, “the devil weep with you”. 1 These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.473 | 0.302 |
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".