MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7024200949

Reports of the proprietors and managers.

2014· article· en· W7024200949 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicLimits and Structures in Graph Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLunaticGovernment (linguistics)Order (exchange)State (computer science)AppropriationBeggingEmbezzlement
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

GENTLEMEN,-We, the Managers of the Temporary Lunatic Asylum, at Beauport, beg leave very respectfully to lay before you the following Report, having reference to the state and condition of the patients entrusted to our care by the Govern- ment, and to the mode in which they have been treated during the past three years.Towards the close of the last century, an order in Coun- cil was passed, authorizing an appropriation for the maintenance of insane persons in the Province of Lower Canada.These insane persons were intrusted to the care of certain religious communities in the respective districts of Montreal, Quebec, and Three Rivers ; the Government paying a yearly sum of about 32 10s.for the support of each patient.*As in similar institutions in Europe, at this period, insane persons were confined merely as unmanageable, or as dan- gerous to the community, or to themselves.No measures were adopted for their restoration to reason.They were shut up in separate cells, were debarred intercourse with the world and with each other, were left to brood over their disordered fancies, until they became maniacal, tore their clothes, became filthy in their habits, and from a well known law of nature, that the faculties become dormant for want of exercise, became imbecile or idiotic.Occasionally a patient was * The sum allowed by Government for the support of each patient was one shilling and eight pence per diem : there were besides occasional appropriation* for the repairs of the building and fence.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

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 head0.180
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)Same topicLimits and Structures in Graph TheoryFrench-language works237,207