MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989284763 · doi:10.1353/vic.2003.0105

Henry and Mary Ponsonby: Life at the Court of Queen Victoria (review)

2003· article· en· W1989284763 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Martha Vicinus

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian Studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicScottish History and National Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueen (butterfly)SpellLawPrime ministerSovereigntyFidesSociologyHistoryPolitical sciencePoliticsTheologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Henry Ponsonby (1825-95) was the oldest son of a military general who died when he was eleven. He was a model son, deferential to authority yet popular with his peers at Sandhurst. After a spell as an aide-de-camp in Ireland, the Crimea, and Canada, Ponsonby became an equerry in Queen Victoria's court. From 1870 until his death he served as the Queen's private secretary. As William M. Kuhn astutely notes, the position originated "not in the [End Page 380] sovereign's readiness for business, but in the sovereign's incapacity for business" (140). Ponsonby served during the years when Victoria's extended mourning was used as an excuse to neglect much official business. The position demanded the utmost tact; Ponsonby's responsibilities ranged from acting as the Queen's go-between with prime ministers to delivering reprimands to her adult children. He always traveled with the royal retinue and could rarely command his own time. Yet he seems to have enjoyed the post. Kuhn makes us appreciate, even like, this talented man who subsumed his personality and ambition to an increasingly difficult queen, whilst always remaining slightly apart, humorously mocking the codes of behavior he did so much to uphold.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
GenreReview

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 venueVictorian StudiesSame topicScottish History and National IdentityFrench-language works237,207