MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390718725 · doi:10.1017/9781805431848.051

Prolocutors of the York convocation

2024· other· en· W4390718725 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1426 John Castell, later precentor of York. 1545 George Palmes, archdeacon of York. 1606 William Goodwyn, chancellor of York. 1640 Henry Wickham, archdeacon of York. Convocation suspended 1641-61 1661 John Neile, archdeacon of Cleveland. Convocation not permitted to transact business, 1717-1861 Convocation revived, 1859-61 1859 Charles Thorp, archdeacon of Durham. 1863 Augustus Duncombe, dean of York. 1880 Benjamin Morgan Cowie, dean of Manchester. 1884 Arthur Perceval Pury-Cust, dean of York. 1888 Thomas Espinell Espin, chancellor of Chester and Liverpool. 1908 Robert Jarratt Crosthwaite, suffragan bishop of Beverley. 1919 William Foxley Norris, dean of York. 1925 Joseph John Scott, dean of York. 1929 Richard Charles Musgrave Harvey, archdeacon of Halifax. 1936 Frederick George Ackerley, archdeacon of Craven. 1943 Henry Leonard Fosbrooke, archdeacon of Lancaster. 1950 Benjamin Pollard, archdeacon of Lancaster. 1955 Arthur Selwyn Bean, archdeacon of Manchester. 1966 George William Outram Addleshaw, dean of Chester. Convocation transfers its legislative powers to General Synod, 1970 1975 Douglas Rawlinson Jones, dean of Chester. 1980 Peter Henry Boulton, canon of Southwell. 1990 John Stanley, canon of Liverpool. 2000 Glyn Hamilton Webster, treasurer of York Minster.

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)0.008
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 score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1130.035

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207