Bibliographic record
Abstract
WE owe much of our knowledge of Joseph Warton, and indeed of his brother Thomas, to John Wooll’s Biographical Memoirs of the late Rev. Joseph Warton D.D. (1806). The Memoirs include a collection of Warton’s letters and poems, and it is from these letters, which have never been traced, that significant and substantial knowledge of the Wartons derives. Unfortunately, Wooll was something of an inexact scholar, and as he had some difficulty reading Warton’s handwriting (not surprisingly) he appears to have misdated an important letter. Thomas Warton the elder had died on 10 September 1745 and Joseph, as the eldest, was concerned with the family’s financial difficulties and proposed a solution to his brother, Thomas, in a letter which Wooll dates 29 October 1746: I have now another scheme to communicate to you, of which I desire you not to speak till I have further consider’d it. Since you left Basingstoke. I have found a great many poems of my Father’s, much better than any we read together. These I am strongly advised to publish by subscription, by Sir Stukely Shuckburgh, Dr. Jackson, and other friends. There are sufficient to make a six shilling octavo volume, and they imagine, as my Father’s acquaintance was large, it would be easy to raise two or three hundred pounds; a very solid argument, in our present situation. It would more than pay all my Father’s debts. Let me know your thoughts upon this subject; but do not yet tell Hampton, or Smythe, who would at first condemn us, without knowing the prudential reasons which induce us to do it. (Wooll, 214–15)
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.067 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.013 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".