MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139477614 · doi:10.1353/vpr.2011.0005

"Faithful Sympathy": Dickens, the Edinburgh Review , and Editing Household Words

2011· article· en· W2139477614 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Iain Crawford

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian periodicals review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Policy, and Dickens Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuccessor cardinalSympathyContext (archaeology)HistorySociologyLiteratureArtPsychologySocial psychologyMathematicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dickens's editorial methods and goals for Household Words can be more fully understood by setting them within the context of his relationships with the editors of the Edinburgh Review and, in particular, of his close ties with Francis Jeffrey. Examining these connections both illuminates the many ways in which he drew from Jeffrey's model of editorial practice and also indicates his ambitious positioning of Household Words as a mid-century, mass-market successor to the great quarterly and as a vehicle for performing his own agenda of cultural formation during the 1850s.

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.176
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.176
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorian periodicals reviewSame topicMigration, Policy, and Dickens StudiesFrench-language works237,207