MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236034198 · doi:10.7765/9781847791405.00019

Conclusion

2013· book-chapter· en· W4236034198 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
H. R. French, R. W. Hoyle

Bibliographic record

VenueManchester University Press eBooks · 2013
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandlordEstateQuarter (Canadian coin)Power (physics)Subject (documents)HistoryGovernment (linguistics)SituatedArable landLawAncient historyEconomic historyGeographyPolitical scienceArchaeologyAgriculturePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter summarises the preceding discussions and presents some concluding thoughts from the authors. Earls Colne was situated within one of the most commercially developed areas of late medieval England. It was on the fringes of London, which in turn implies a regionally specific historical experience. The arrival of a resident landlord in a village was a common experience in the century after 1540. Where this occurred, personal supervision replaced power structures that had relied on monastic, aristocratic or crown stewards. In Earls Colne, this change disturbed a situation in which the village had sometimes taken liberties over its rights or lapsed into self-government. The Harlakendens remained a presence in the village for most of the following century, but the landlord interest in Earls Colne did not develop beyond the limits established then. Earls Colne never had a great nineteenth-century house or park, or model arable farms staffed by day labourers, nor was it incorporated into a great estate. It remained a parish of variegated holdings, with landowners both large and small, because it failed to follow the developmental paths taken by some of the other English villages that have been the subject of exhaustive historical study.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManchester University Press eBooksSame topicHistorical Economic and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207