Progressive Enlightenment: The Origins of the Gaslight Industry 1780â1820
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gaslight, an Industrial Revolution technology, developed in the period 1780–1820. The foundations for the technology are partly found in the pneumatic chemistry of the eighteenth century, both in terms of the knowledge of gases and their properties, and the instruments used to manipulate them, such as the gasometer, making gaslight one of the earliest instances of a technology heavily based on science. Although many people experimented with lighting with gases in the late eighteenth century, the move to a commercial technology began with Philippe Lebon and William Murdock who had a clear commercial purpose in mind. The technology in its early phases was found everywhere in Europe, but it was at Boulton & Watt in Birmingham that it was first successfully applied. As Boulton & Watt developed the technology they identified many and solved some of the problems associated with scaling up the technology. They were not, however, very interested in gaslight and only sporadically gave attention to it, before effectively abandoning it around 1812. They nevertheless had an important role to play in its development not only because if their technical work, but also because they demonstrated the technology’s viability to the broad public, and by giving people experience in gas engineering. The technology's final form as a network utility was partly as a result of a battle fought between Boulton & Watt and Frederick Winsor's Gas Light and Coke Company in London during 1807–1810. Boutlon & Watt did not want a large limited-liability corporation as a competitor, and the contest in Parliament between the two groups resulted in a negotiated compromise where the Gas Light and Coke Company gave up all rights to manufacture apparatus, and focused exclusively on gas provision, effectively making it a utility. The years from 1812–1820 saw the technology mature into a large network which included not only technical development, such as the pressure balancing with valves and regulators, but also political and social elements, such as the control of user expectations through education and usage enforcement through inspectors. By 1820, the technology was sufficiently developed to be transferred to the Continent.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".