MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1826536813 · doi:10.2307/3660950

[no title]

2003· article· en· W1826536813 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Don H. Doyle, Enrico Dal Lago, Rick Halpern

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American History · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAmerican History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryHumanitiesClassicsLibrary scienceArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This book is an excellent example of the current enthusiasm for breaking out of the encrusted national boundaries that have confined historical thinking since the beginnings of our profession. It is also an illustration of how a powerful tradition of national specialization may obstruct that endeavor. Enrico Dal Lago, an Italian historian of the United States trained at London University and now teaching in Galway, Ireland, together with Rick Halpern, an American teaching at London University and now the University of Toronto, seem ideal for the task. Their Commonwealth Conference at London University drew dozens of historians from the United States, Italy, and Britain together to examine the “two Souths”: Dixie and the Mezzogiorno (literally “midday” and usually referring to the area south of Rome). Selected papers from that conference, revised, expanded, and at times connected to one another, constitute this book. Peter Kolchin's essay shows how most efforts to identify what is distinctive about the American South usually assume a comparative basis, and he extols the virtues of cross-national comparison as being “exceptionally fruitful” (p. 37). Like so many virtues, international history is more often prescribed than practiced, and the essays in this book demonstrate the difficulty and reluctance historians experience in actually breaching the national boundaries of their special knowledge. Each essay typically opens with a salute to the comparative purpose of the book, then deals exclusively with Italy or the United States. As a result, the book consists mostly of what Kolchin calls “historical juxtaposition,” wherein case studies are set side by side and “any comparison is left to the reader” (p. 47). That said, Dal Lago and Halpern have done a superb job in juxtaposing the essays, and they do not leave it all to the reader (or the authors) to draw out parallels. Many of the pieces could stand alone as brilliant contributions to their field. Fine essays by Richard Follett, Marta Petrusewicz, Steven Hahn, and Lucy Riall examine the role of landed elites and rural workers first in the United States and then in the Italian South. Two essays on gender by J. William Harris and Giovanna Fiume offer another parallel between the regions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of American HistorySame topicAmerican History and CultureFrench-language works237,207