MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1692902487

Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence: A Cultural Studies Reading

2011· article· en· W1692902487 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hossein Pirnajmuddin, Fatemeh Shahpoori Arani

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in literature and language · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican and British Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInnocenceCapitalismReading (process)Interpretation (philosophy)SociologyCultural studiesAestheticsLiteratureArtLawAnthropologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyLinguisticsPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Age of Innocence, a novel written by Edith Wharton in 1920, demonstrates the polished outward manners of powerful wealthy families of the 1870s New York. The novel offers a good opportunity for cultural studies of an American society at the end of the nineteenth century. Through language, Edith Wharton has turned social and individual behaviors of New Yorkers into a text which makes reading and interpretation of those people possible. Given that the word culture has, and has had, myriad meanings and changing significance for different societies and in different periods, for a study of this kind a variety of factors (like capitalism, class, gender, city, and family) are considered crucial. This study focuses on some cultural concepts dominant in The Age of Innocence: high art, capitalism, city and citizenship, family, and marriage.Key words: Cultural studies; Edith Wharton; The Age of Innocence; High art; Capitalism; City; Family; Marriage.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in literature and languageSame topicAmerican and British Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207