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 OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Charles Beem

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.014
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
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

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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HistorySame topicHistorical Economic and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207