MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enfield after the Sixties

2025· book-chapter· en· W4414510233 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Willa Cofield, Cynthia Samuelson, Mildred Sexton, David Cecelski

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Press of Mississippi eBooks · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVietnamese History and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite (mutation)PopulationWork (physics)DemographicsCivil rights

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter examines the changes in the town of Enfield after the protests ended in the 1960s. The agitators, as they were called by the segregationists, were gone and the signs reading “WHITE” and “COLORED” were removed. Eventually, the schools were desegregated, consistent with the legal requirements of the Civil Rights Act, although inconsistent with the intent of the legislation. The first six Black students transferred from Inborden to the White Enfield Graded School in 1964; however, it was not until the 1970s that the two schools in Enfield were fully integrated. Inborden became Inborden Elementary School, and the Enfield Graded School became Enfield High School. As integration in the schools progressed, many White families moved their children to the private, all-White Enfield Academy. But in spite of the continued resistance to integrate the school system by some White families, Blacks were elected to fill positions on the Halifax County Schools Board of Education and town officials finally took action to desegregate the Enfield Public Library. The chapter also considers the elimination of the curfew whistle; the changes in the population and demographics of Enfield; the election of Black officials; and the completion of Interstate 95 in 1969, which had a major impact on businesses in Enfield. Finally, it looks at the significant changes on Dixie Street and in farming practices in Enfield.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Press of Mississippi eBooksSame topicVietnamese History and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207