Reading Genesis in the Long Eighteenth Century. From Milton to Mary Shelley. By Ana M. Acosta.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Literaryre-workings of Genesis—by which is often meant, incidentally, as indeed also here, the first three books of Genesis, telling of the creation and the fall—are both numerous (see Watson Kirkconnell's The Celestial Cycle, Toronto, 1952, for example, with less obvious instances in works like R. W. B. Lewis, The American Adam, Chicago, 1955) and much studied. Ana M. Acosta's excellent study focuses upon a group of works in the period extending from the nine-book Paradise Lost in 1667 to Frankenstein in 1818, devoting full chapters not only to Milton and to Mary Shelley, but also to Rousseau and to Mary Wollstonecraft. The extended century would have allowed for the inclusion of Kleist's Marionettentheater, incidentally, and it is a pity that that one work (amongst many, of course) in particular was not included. The work does, on the other hand, treat in the first chapter with...
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.006 |
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".