MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995043301 · doi:10.3138/utq.78.4.949

‘<i>The Marchbanks Archive</i>’: Editing the <i>Marchbanks</i> Series

2009· article· en· W1995043301 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dean Irvine

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican and British Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeries (stratigraphy)AmusementHistoryClassicsComputer scienceArt historyLiteratureArtPsychologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In his introduction to the 1985 omnibus edition of the Marchbanks series, Robertson Davies promised to ‘equip the work of Marchbanks with what is called “a scholarly apparatus.”’ The apparatus to that volume is the closest that an ‘editor’ has come to producing a scholarly edition of Davies' fiction. Editors have compiled selected volumes of his non-fiction, his correspondence, and his quotations, but none of his editors has attempted to play the scholarly role that the author himself so thoroughly – albeit gently – mocked in the final instalment of the Marchbanks series. Despite Davies' evident amusement at the idea of equipping his writings with a scholarly apparatus, this essay foolishly proposes a theoretical model for a scholarly edition of the Marchbanks series.

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)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.158 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicAmerican and British Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207