MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989452549

Balancing the scales: the development of public poor relief on Prince Edward Island, 1769 to 1909

2024· article· en· W6989452549 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueIslandScholar (University of Prince Edward Island) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoor reliefGovernment (linguistics)ColonialismIndependence (probability theory)Nova scotiaMainland
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the first 150 years after Prince Edward Island was established as the British colony of St. John’s Island, it was almost completely isolated from the mainland during the long winter months by thick dangerous shifting ice packs that impeded communication and restricted the transportation of people and goods to and from the outside world. This isolation strengthening Islanders collective identity, as well as their sense of independence and resourcefulness as a people. Following its separation from Nova Scotia, an Order-in-Council had established Prince Edward Island’s colonial government institutions of Governor, Council, Supreme Court, and in 1773, Assembly. Yet, it did not introduce a poor relief system, nor did it require that the English poor laws be implemented by the Island’s government. As a result, over time, the government of Prince Edward Island created its own poor relief system. Using primary and secondary sources, this thesis examines the development of Prince Edward Island’s public poor relief system during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in comparison with the nearby colony of Nova Scotia which had adopted English Poor Laws. It demonstrates that the Island’s environmental, economic, political, and social conditions had an influence on the establishment of its public poor relief system and the Islanders served by it.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.212 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueIslandScholar (University of Prince Edward Island)Same topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207