MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964925965 · doi:10.1093/litthe/frm001

Reading Genesis in the Long Eighteenth Century. From Milton to Mary Shelley. By Ana M. Acosta.

2007· article· en· W1964925965 on OpenAlex
B. Murdoch

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLiterature and Theology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParadise lostPityPhilosophyReading (process)WatsonLiteratureArtClassicsArt historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.240 · 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