MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315437243 · doi:10.1017/s1060150313000065

EVOLUTIONARY DISCOURSE AND THE CREDIT ECONOMY IN ELIZABETH GASKELL'S<i>WIVES AND DAUGHTERS</i>

2013· article· en· W2315437243 on OpenAlex
Mary Elizabeth Leighton, Lisa Surridge

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian Literature and Culture · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Institutions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPassionsSelfishnessTributeWickednessReputationHistorySociologyLiteratureArtLawPhilosophyArt historyTheologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When Elizabeth Gaskell died in November 1865, she left unfinished her final novel, Wives and Daughters (1864–66). The Cornhill Magazine 's editor, Frederick Greenwood, published a tribute to Gaskell with the novel's final installment. Her fiction, he wrote, pulls you from “an abominable wicked world, crawling with selfishness and reeking with base passions into one where there is much weakness, many mistakes, sufferings long and bitter, but where it is possible for people to live calm and wholesome lives . . .” (Gaskell 685–86; ch. 60). As Linda K. Hughes and Michael Lund observe, Greenwood shaped Gaskell's reputation for a hundred years “as an author whose work captured . . . the idyllic charm of a lost era” and took “readers away from unpleasant realities” (158). Notably, Greenwood's list of “unpleasant realities” (wickedness, selfishness, and base passions) implicitly refers to capitalism — that is, to the economic world of the 1860s from which Gaskell ostensibly encouraged her readers to retreat.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.181 · 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