MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7143757662 · doi:10.60171/00005024

バークの『カトリック法論』

2008· article· ja· W7143757662 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
正己 真嶋, Masami Majima

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies of British Isles
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrishAssertionPoliticsPremiseQuarter (Canadian coin)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Irish Affairs was one of the political subjects with which Edmund Burke (1729-97) got deeply involved as a member of the House of Commons. In this paper I will examine his famous Tracts relating to Popery Laws, analyze his assertion in line with the contest, and then discuss its significance. The Tracts was not only his first political pamphlet but also the first of his vindication of the Irish Catholics and Ireland. In addition, it provided even the basis for his later arguments regarding Irish problems. The latter is especially the major premise of this paper. In the Tracts, Burke criticized the popery laws directed against the Irish Catholics from three aspects: The first was that the popery laws were not legally valid. Second, they compelled the Irish Catholics to convert to a specified religion (the Church of Ireland) unjustly. Finally they debilitated Ireland and Great Britain as well. Surveying the points at issue carefully, one notices that Burke had attached great importance to the various disabilities intended to exclude Catholics from property, especially landed propety, and can conclude that he had considered the popery laws to be injurious to the British Constitution.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.189 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicHistorical Studies of British IslesFrench-language works237,207