MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236818308 · doi:10.3138/cjh.39.3.457

“I Am Her Majesty’s Subject”: Prince George of Denmark and the Transformation of the English Male Consort

2004· article· en· W4236818308 on OpenAlex
Charles Beem

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of History · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorge (robot)MajestyWifeSubject (documents)Queen (butterfly)ContradictionParliamentClassicsSettlement (finance)HistoryAncient historySociologyLawPhilosophyPoliticsTheologyArt historyPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most enigmatic historical figures in late Stuart England was Prince George of Denmark (1653-1708), the husband of Queen Anne (r. 1702-1714). Unlike Philip of Spain, the husband of Mary I (r.1553-1558), who held the position of king consort, and William of Orange, later William III, the husband of Mary II (r. 1689-1694), who reigned as king in his own right, George of Denmark did not attain the position of king. George’s relegation to a status subordinate to his wife was a glaring contradiction to prevailing contemporary social theory, yet an explanation for this occurrence is completely absent from the body of historical studies concerned with the Revolution of 1688/89 and the passage of the Act of Settlement of 1701.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.165 · 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