Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the 1990s and 2000s, national histories of the book achieved a double milestone: firstly, they marked the coming to maturity of the subdiscipline of the history of the book itself, especially in English-speaking countries; at the same time they established landmarks in the cultural history of their own countries. My presentation will discuss the fate and the impact of national book histories from the point of view of the History of the Book in Australia , which I coedited and to which I contributed several chapters. Two historiographical events have challenged the agenda of national book histories. The ‘transnational turn’ has thrown into question the fundamental framework which governed their conception and production. To a lesser extent, the growth of the digital humanities also makes a radical departure from the ‘traditional’ research methods of the 1990s. My presentation will assess the legacy of the History of the Book in Australia so far, and ask whether national book history has any role to play in the age of transnational approaches. I will suggest in answer to my own question that there remains a place at the table for all three levels—transnational, national and also micro-histories of the book.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".