MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Highways, law and governance

2025· article· en· W6925183132 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Lancaster · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHistory of Computing Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatutory lawCorporate governanceStatuteGovernment (linguistics)Service (business)LiabilityDiversity (politics)State (computer science)Politics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transport historians have made an increasingly strong case for connectivity and mobility in Stuart England even before the introduction of turnpike trusts in the eighteenth century. There has, however, been little explanation of how this was achieved at local level, nor has the broader historiography of government in this period given infrastructure the attention it merits, since the painstaking, but dated, research, of the Webbs. This study explores the diversity of approaches to the administration of highway infrastructure by the townships of Halifax parish in addressing a range of travel and transport needs on foot and horseback in an upland area largely inaccessible to wheeled vehicles. The research is concerned with how townships managed their highways, who the officeholders were, how they negotiated relationships with other agents and institutions, and the implications of a reconceptualisation of the highways function for current debates on state formation. Exploiting excellent manorial and township records, the analysis takes advantage of GIS mapping techniques to re-evaluate the governance of highways, as townships in the parish responded to statutory, political and socio-economic change. A review of the legal framework shows how the Tudor co-option of manorial courts for monitoring statutory compliance resulted in a hybrid system of tenurial liability and communal obligation. Broad-based participation was subject to increasing middling-sort assertiveness, and records from Sowerby township testify to precocious funding of maintenance from the constables’ rates, supervised by a powerful vestry. Economic activities, such as pastoral agriculture, textile manufacturing, mining and quarrying, and the service sector were significant drivers of road management priorities. The research argues that manorial and township institutions deserve more recognition for creative and effective solutions to problems of access and connectivity through presentment routines. Success in managing highways in the parish depended on the participation of better-off landholders both as officeholders and in discharging individual and collective obligations for maintenance and cleansing. The institutions of manor and vestry provided legitimacy to the governance of the highways function, and thereby contributed to the resilience of the seventeenth-century state.

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.164 · 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