Bibliographic record
Abstract
When a significant body of work by a major author emerges from obscurity, scholarship and dissemination follow a fairly predictable trajectory. The first wave, necessarily biographical and bibliographical, places the material within the author's life and career and makes it accessible through careful editorial work. Burney's plays have been fortunate in this regard: the plays first came to our attention through the work of Joyce Hemlow, whose deep knowledge of Burney contextualised them within her biography and literary corpus. Hemlow's 'Fanny Burney: Playwright' and her subsequent The History of Fanny Burney described the manuscripts, summarised the plots, connected them to Burney's personal literary life, and initiated a scholarly focus on Burney's dramatic output. When Margaret Anne Doody took up the plays in her literary biography of Burney, she gave them the kind of serious consideration that ensured that they would never again be relegated to the margins of Burney's work. Uncovering in them innovative techniques, acerbic social commentary and a rich source of information on Burney's growth as an artist, Doody makes the plays full partners with the better known novels and journals.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".