Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robert Burns & Friends essays by W. Ormiston Roy Fellows presented to G. Ross Roy edited by Patrick Scott and Kenneth Simpson This volume of essays about the Scottish poet Robert Burns (1759-1796) pays tribute to the distinguished Burns scholar G. Ross Roy. Subjects covered include writers who influenced Burns; aspects of the writing of Burns and that of his friends and contemporaries; and Burns's influence on later writers. The volume also includes essays on Ross Roy's own accomplishments and on the Burns collection he built (now at the University of South Carolina), together with a checklist of his published writings. G. Ross Roy, Distinguished Professor Emeritus of English and Comparative Literature, founded the journal Studies in Scottish Literature in 1963, and as its editor for nearly fifty years he has had a central role in establishing international academic recognition for the field. His own scholarly work includes the standard Letters of Robert Burns (2 vols., Clarendon Press, 1985). His contributions to Scottish literature have earned him honorary doctorates from the Universities of Edinburgh (2002) and Glasgow (2009). The contributors are all former W. Ormiston Roy Visiting Fellows at the University of South Carolina. This book is also available in a print edition (ISBN: 978-1439270974) through the usual on-line vendors. It is not available for direct purchase from the editors or the University of South Carolina.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.044 | 0.010 |
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".