MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080333397 · doi:10.3138/utq.77.3.801

Cold War Milton

2008· article· en· W2080333397 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sharon Achinstein

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, History, and Historiography
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArts and Humanities Research CouncilYale University
KeywordsHistoricismPoliticsHistoryCriticismNew HistoricismCommunismLiteratureContext (archaeology)Literary criticismClassicsLawPolitical scienceArtArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Careful analysis of the historical context in which the first (1953) volume of Yale's magisterial edition of Milton's prose works, ‘Yale I,’ was produced reveals how the Milton it represents was shaped by current events – specifically, how Cold War developments threatened editor Don Wolfe's very American vision of what a liberal society should be. The exhaustive historical detail provided in Yale I's textual apparatus, its introduction and notes, not only portrays the political turmoil of seventeenth-century England but also represents Milton as a fierce opponent of political dangers clearly perceived as similar to those rampant in Cold War America – dangers such as McCarthyite anti-Communism, the rise of the defence-driven research university, and the ascendancy of that institution's favourite form of literary studies, the New Criticism. Ironically, Wolfe's presentism safeguarded historicist interest in Milton, inoculating Milton studies not only against the de-historicizing drive of New Criticism but also against the later innovations of the New Historicism.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.005

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.147 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicPhilosophy, History, and HistoriographyFrench-language works237,207