MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Recruitment, Provisioning and Pay

2022· book-chapter· en· W4297135693 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ian Gentles

Bibliographic record

VenueYale University Press eBooks · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentOfficerRevenueCommonsEngineeringProvisioningHouse of CommonsQuarter (Canadian coin)ManagementOperations researchPublic administrationLawPolitical scienceOperations managementBusinessFinanceEconomicsHistoryTelecommunicationsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter reviews the newly formed army, the New Model Army, and a new roster of officers that had been approved. It explores how the New Model received priority in funding, supply and recruitment in preference to all the remaining forces under parliamentary authority. The chapter also examines the timely collection of the army's chief revenue source and a common hindrance to the smooth flow of assessment money: the practice of free quarter. With the ordinance for a monthly assessment in place, the Commons next set about raising men for the new army. The chapter then shifts to discuss how the Army Committee organised the recruiting effort. In principle, all men between the ages of eighteen and sixty-five were liable to impressment. The gigantic task of outfitting the new army began as soon as the officer list was complete. The chapter then elaborates on the arms, ammunition, clothing and other equipment needed for the summer campaign. It concludes by investigating how Parliament's success in meeting the challenges of money, supply and recruitment contributed tremendously to Sir Thomas Fairfax's unbroken chain of victories in the coming year.

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)0.006
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0470.013

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.108 · 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
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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