MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4328004036 · doi:10.1017/9781846152399.002

The Senate

2004· other· en· W4328004036 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterNominationQuarter (Canadian coin)Crown (dentistry)Political scienceSubject (documents)LawHistoryMedicineLibrary scienceArchaeologyOrthodontics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neither the Charter of 1858, nor the subsequent Charter of 1863, nor the Supplemental Charters of 1867 and 1878, changed the overall size of the governing body, the Senate, which had been fixed in the original version, in 1836. Its formal composition continued to be a Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor plus thirty-six Fellows. The Chancellor and the Fellows were appointed by the Crown and held office during good behaviour: the Vice-Chancellor was elected by the Senate from amongst the Fellows, and was subject to annual re-election. However, from 1858 onwards, while all Fellows continued to be appointed by the Crown, the practice began of filling a proportion of vacancies from among persons elected by Convocation. Every other new Fellow appointed after April, 1858, was to be chosen, by the Crown, from three elected nominees of Convocation, until a quarter of the Fellowship – nine Fellows – consisted of Convocation nominees – a quota reached in 1866. Thereafter the elective device was employed to fill one vacancy in four. In what follows, the Fellows appointed after nomination and election by Convocation are described as ‘Convocation-nominated’. Those Fellows appointed directly by the Crown are described as ‘Crown-chosen’. As significant as the formal change which brought Convocation nominees on to the Senate was the change in the attitude of Governments, after 1858, to the matter of filling vacancies. For the first two decades of its existence, the Senate had often been well below its full strength. Deaths and retirements reduced the Fellowship by almost a third in the 1840s. The Conservative Government of Sir Robert Peel, from 1841 to 1846, and Lord Derby’s two short-lived Conservative Governments in the 1850s, made no appointments. But in Lord John Russell’s Administration, six new members were added in 1849–50; and in Lord Palmerston’s first spell in Downing Street a new Chancellor and six new Fellows were appointed in 1856–57. Among the latter were the first two London graduates to enter the Senate – Frederick John Wood and William Withey Gull. Just before the 1858 Charter came into effect, they were joined by Charles James Foster, one of the leaders of the graduates, who was to be the first Chairman of Convocation.

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)0.007
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3000.307

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolitical Systems and Governance→French-language works237,207→