MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2304613890 · doi:10.1093/notesj/gjv223

J. Gerald Kennedy and Leland S. Person (eds),<i>The American Novel to 1870</i>.

2016· article· en· W2304613890 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kevin J. Hayes

Bibliographic record

VenueNotes and Queries · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican and British Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipHistoryHistory of literatureLiterary criticismAmerican literatureClassicsColonialismLiteratureNationalityCriticismArt historyArtLawImmigrationPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DURING the 1930s and 1940s—the Golden Age of Literary Scholarship—literary history was the crowning endeavour of the discipline. New Criticism subsequently cast a pall over the study of literature that has lingered for decades. The past few years have seen a new interest in literary history, however. This renaissance has not been driven by the academic community, which remains spellbound by critical theory. Rather, it has been motivated by a few keen editors at a few major university presses, who have recognized the importance of literary history and are doing what they can to perpetuate it. Traditionally, major literary histories have been organized by nation. The Oxford History of the Novel in English , a projected twelve-volume set, is organized by language instead of nationality. The organization makes good sense, allowing volume editors to cover not only British and American novels, but also novels in English from Africa, Asia, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the South Pacific. The American Novel to 1870 , edited by J. Gerald Kennedy and Leland S. Person, forms the fifth volume. Organized in a roughly chronological manner, the volume is divided into seven parts, all containing from four to eight chapters each. In Chapter 1, ‘Before the American Novel’, for example, Betsy Erkkila discusses colonial American prose preceding the novel’s emergence: autobiographies, histories, travels. Predictably, she devotes the fullest attention to Mary Rowlandson and Olaudah Equiano. She avoids discussing early American verse as a precursor to the novel: a possible error. After all, the quest for an American epic poem embodied the same creative impulse as the great American novel, that is, to write a work commensurate with the greatness of the nation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.010

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.195 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNotes and QueriesSame topicAmerican and British Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207