MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990394516

De Herlaars in het Midden-Nederlandse rivierengebied (ca. 1075 - ca. 1400)

2017· dissertation· en· W6990394516 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLeiden Repository (Leiden University) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosition (finance)Quarter (Canadian coin)GeopoliticsPower (physics)Focus (optics)Property (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main question of this thesis is: how did the Herlaars acquire their position in the Dutch river area and manage to maintain it for a long time, and what served as the basis of power? The concept of 'maatschappelijk vermogen', introduced by Schmidt in 1986, is used to describe the position and power of the Herlaars. The focus of this research is pointed to the Herlaars with their extensive possessions in the Dutch River area. The development of power as described provides an image of power and also answers the question how the Herlaars managed to maintain their position. The Herlaars seem to have been very aware of both the opportunities and the threats offered by the geopolitical ambitions of these great lords. In the second quarter of the 14th century the Herlaars managed to acquire seigneurial rights and substantial houses in the border area of the territory of Gelre and Brabant. However, this property was not used by the Herlaars to consolidate or gain a position in the territory of the landlords, or to acquire even more possessions. My research shows that the Herlaars were no border lords but something more humble, noblemen living on the border.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1040.021

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeiden Repository (Leiden University)Same topicMedieval Literature and HistoryFrench-language works237,207