tegwick
a9ca0adfcf
Batch evaluation of all 988 entities via OpenRouter. 984 succeeded on first pass; 3 failed (network errors). eval-summary --update-metrics written with per_entity_mean=3.9556. Viability dashboard: 6/6 PASS redundancy_ratio 0.0061 (max 0.10) coverage_ratio 0.6190 (min 0.40) coherence_comps 0.0000 (max 3) consistency_cycles 0.0000 (max 0) granularity_entropy 2.6748 (min 1.0) per_entity_mean 3.9556 (min 3.5) Dimension breakdown (mean across 985 entities): definition_precision 3.62 source_grounding 4.36 domain_placement 4.56 vsm_relevance 3.31 explanatory_value 3.94 Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
65 lines
3.5 KiB
Markdown
65 lines
3.5 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
entity_slug: commonalty
|
|
evaluator: null
|
|
evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T05:01:00.816594'
|
|
overall_score: 4.4
|
|
scores:
|
|
- name: definition_precision
|
|
value: 4.0
|
|
max_value: 5.0
|
|
rationale: The definition clearly distinguishes commonalty as a specific legal-political
|
|
status granting corporate identity and governance rights to townspeople, rather
|
|
than just referring to "common people" generally. It precisely captures the institutional
|
|
dimension of collective legal personality and unified action capability.
|
|
- name: source_grounding
|
|
value: 4.0
|
|
max_value: 5.0
|
|
rationale: Smith does discuss how towns were granted corporate privileges and self-governance
|
|
rights in Book III, Chapter 3, making this concept well-grounded in the source
|
|
material. The entity accurately reflects Smith's analysis of urban institutional
|
|
development and legal frameworks.
|
|
- name: domain_placement
|
|
value: 5.0
|
|
max_value: 5.0
|
|
rationale: The "Regulation" domain is perfectly appropriate since commonalty represents
|
|
the institutional and legal framework through which towns regulated their internal
|
|
affairs and commercial activities. This is fundamentally about governance structures
|
|
and regulatory mechanisms.
|
|
- name: vsm_relevance
|
|
value: 5.0
|
|
max_value: 5.0
|
|
rationale: This entity maps clearly to S3 (internal regulation) as it describes
|
|
the institutional structure for collective governance and regulation within towns.
|
|
It also has elements of S5 (identity/policy) as it establishes the legal identity
|
|
and decision-making authority of the urban community.
|
|
- name: explanatory_value
|
|
value: 4.0
|
|
max_value: 5.0
|
|
rationale: The concept illuminates an important structural mechanism in Smith's
|
|
analysis - how towns developed the institutional capacity for collective economic
|
|
action and self-regulation. It explains the legal-political foundation that enabled
|
|
urban commercial development and autonomy.
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Evaluation: Commonalty
|
|
|
|
## definition_precision — 4.0 / 5.0
|
|
|
|
The definition clearly distinguishes commonalty as a specific legal-political status granting corporate identity and governance rights to townspeople, rather than just referring to "common people" generally. It precisely captures the institutional dimension of collective legal personality and unified action capability.
|
|
|
|
## source_grounding — 4.0 / 5.0
|
|
|
|
Smith does discuss how towns were granted corporate privileges and self-governance rights in Book III, Chapter 3, making this concept well-grounded in the source material. The entity accurately reflects Smith's analysis of urban institutional development and legal frameworks.
|
|
|
|
## domain_placement — 5.0 / 5.0
|
|
|
|
The "Regulation" domain is perfectly appropriate since commonalty represents the institutional and legal framework through which towns regulated their internal affairs and commercial activities. This is fundamentally about governance structures and regulatory mechanisms.
|
|
|
|
## vsm_relevance — 5.0 / 5.0
|
|
|
|
This entity maps clearly to S3 (internal regulation) as it describes the institutional structure for collective governance and regulation within towns. It also has elements of S5 (identity/policy) as it establishes the legal identity and decision-making authority of the urban community.
|
|
|
|
## explanatory_value — 4.0 / 5.0
|
|
|
|
The concept illuminates an important structural mechanism in Smith's analysis - how towns developed the institutional capacity for collective economic action and self-regulation. It explains the legal-political foundation that enabled urban commercial development and autonomy.
|