MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1482458596 · doi:10.21971/p7w885

Swift's Switch: The Intricacies of Turning Tory

2008· article· en· W1482458596 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Steven D. Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossing boundaries · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIrish and British Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwiftPoliticsAllegianceNegotiationIrishPower (physics)Political scienceHistoryLawPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jonathan Swift is widely recognized as a major writer in English. His Gulliver's Travels, A Tale of a Tub, and "A Modest Proposal," in particular, are masterpieces of political satire. Swift was never a politician in his own right, but the politics of his writing and his role as a politically committed priest in the Irish Anglican Church made him important nonetheless as a political and historical figure. In fact, for a time in the early eighteenth century, Swift truly became a part of English politics, first by negotiating with the English government on the part of the Irish Church, and then by beginning to write political propaganda for the Tory regime then in power. Near the end of 1710, Jonathan Swift changed his political allegiance from Whig to Tory. This paper discusses the four major explanations that have been advanced regarding Swift's "switch," and suggests that none of the four is adequate, though all of them contain elements of what is likely to have happened. It suggests, further, that Swift's switch was at least as much a result of the changing nature of political parties and the party system as inconsistency on Swift's part.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.040
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0040.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrossing boundariesSame topicIrish and British StudiesFrench-language works237,207