Bibliography of Contextual (Systemic and Empirical) Approaches in the Study of Literature and Culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
s empirical study of literature (Empirische Literaturwissenschaft), Jacques Dubois's theory of the literary institution (l'institution littraire), and Pierre Bourdieu's theory of the literary field (champ littraire). Relevant items are also included from systems-oriented frameworks following Robert Estivals's systme d'criture and the macrosystem approach of Immanuel Wallerstein. Several of these theoretical frameworks are less known on the theoretical landscape of US-American scholarship and thus the "contextual" designation comes closest to the postulates of the frameworks each of which with various degrees of systems and/or empirical orientation. The bibliography includes 1) theoretical and meta-theoretical studies, 2) applications of above frameworks, and 3) selected works whose theoretical trajectory, although not explicitly stated, is similar to above frameworks. The bibliography contains works published in English, French, and German. However, it should be noted that there exists a substantial corpus of above frameworks in Dutch-, Hungarian-, Russian-, Portuguese-, Spanish, and Swedish-, as well as, in smaller numbers, in Bulgarian-, Chinese-, Czech-,
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.023 | 0.053 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.003 |
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".