MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255821306 · doi:10.4324/9780203029626-14

THE SOCIAL CREDIT MOVEMENT AFTER 1930

2006· book-chapter· en· W4255821306 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical and Economic history of UK and US
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovement (music)Political scienceArtAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relegation of social credit to a footnote in the history of economic thought is accurate only to the extent that ‘economic thought’ is defined as the principles accepted by mainstream orthodoxy, i.e. of capitalism. Social credit has a separate history as a school of economic thought of the common people, encapsulating resistance to the economics of exploitation. The main events associated with the history of the social credit movement in Canada during the 1930s have been extensively documented (see Douglas 1937; McCarthy 1947; Mallory 1954; Irving 1959; Macpherson 1962; Finlay 1972; Sinclair 1972; Finkel 1989). This chapter focuses upon the social credit movement in the United Kingdom.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolitical and Economic history of UK and USFrench-language works237,207