MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079830162 · doi:10.1525/hlq.2006.69.3.477

Book History and the Consumer

2006· article· en· W2079830162 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michelle Levy

Bibliographic record

VenueHuntington Library Quarterly · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature: history, themes, analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStanzaRomancePoetryPower (physics)LiteratureCraftArtHistorySermonArt historyClassics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. S. T. Coleridge, The Statesman’s Manual: A Lay Sermon, quoted in Paul Keen, ed., Revolutions in Romantic Literature: An Anthology of Print Culture, 1780–1832 (Peterborough, Ontario, 2004), 19. 2. S. T. Coleridge, Biographia Literaria, ed. James Engell and W. Jackson Bate (Princeton, N.J., 1983), 48–49. 3. Percy Shelley, The Major Works (Oxford, 2003), 680. To be sure, there were those with opposing views: Anna Barbauld, who in her 1810 anthology British Novelists noted that while the “humble novel” might be “condemned by the grave, and despised by the fastidious, . . . their leaves are seldom found unopened” ( “On the Origin and Profess of Novel-Writing,” Selected Poetry and Prose of Anna Barbauld, ed. William McCarthy and Elizabeth Craft [Peterborough, Ontario, 2002], 407, 377); and Byron, who accepted that readers had the ultimate power to decide—at the end of Canto I of Don Juan, he told his readers that he would only write more, and thus they would only “meet again, if we should understand / Each other”: Lord Byron: The Major Works, ed. Jerome McGann (Oxford, 2000), p. 143 (canto 1, stanza 222, lines 765–66). William St. Clair The Reading Nation in the Romantic Period cambridge: cambridge university press, 2004. xxix + 765 pages isbn: 978-0-521-81006-7

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.156
Teacher spread0.149 · 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.

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuntington Library QuarterlySame topicLiterature: history, themes, analysisFrench-language works237,207