HEATHER CLARK. The Grief of Influence: Sylvia Plath and Ted Hughes.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The publication of a volume of poems by one poet very rarely leads to a flurry of critical activity being devoted to another, especially one dead for 35 years. But that is exactly what happened after the publication of Birthday Letters by Ted Hughes in 1998. Birthday Letters revealed that since the death of Sylvia Plath in 1963 a kind of one-sided conversation between husband and wife, poet and poet, had been going on for decades in the husband’s head. There had been other muted or oblique fragments of that conversation in some of his poems written in the intervening years, but in Birthday Letters the husband finally put it all down as his last word on the matter. Inevitably the new materials stimulated not only interest in Plath, but in a sub-field of Plath and Hughes studies that had lain more or less fallow ever since Margaret Uroff’s ground-breaking study of the two poets together in 1979. Of course, in any study of Plath over the years, Hughes was never far off, but, typically, his presence was seen in one dimension only, either as a loyal servant of the wife’s brilliant but flawed imaginings or, more commonly, as a malign force.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.006 |
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".