BOOK REVIEW: Ronald Reichertz.<b>THE MAKING OF THE ALICE BOOKS: LEWIS CARROLL'S USE OF EARLIER CHILDREN'S LITERATURE</b>. Montreal, QC and Kingston, ON: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1997.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perhaps it seems a backhanded compliment to say that a principal value of Ronald Reichertz's very useful book lies in its appendices. But that may have been Reichertz's plan. He gives only a third of his book--fewer than eighty pages--to the unfolding of his argument "that Carroll's fantasies incorporate an extensive literary tradition [. . .] that had been assimilated into children's literature before the Alice books were written" (4). "Incorporate" is the important word in his sentence. The many stories and poems he names and describes in the six chapters of his argument provide, in Reichertz's view, not just a context for Lewis Carroll's books; to an extent insufficiently remarked and studied by other commentators, they often furnish the very stuff of his writing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it