Bibliographic record
Abstract
One measure of writers' rising status is by their receiving honours, titles, and prizes. This period saw the first writer to be raised to the peerage solely for services to literature — Tennyson in 1883 — yet in this instance and in many others, where writers accepted or refused knighthoods, politics mattered too. Case studies involving J. M. Barrie, Arnold Bennett, Walter Besant, Thomas Carlyle, Conan Doyle, Galsworthy, Kipling, Lewis Morris, Quiller-Couch, Walter Raleigh, Leslie Stephen, Rabindranath Tagore, H. G. Wells, and W. B. Yeats, are examined. Comparisons are made with artists and actors, and publishers and newspaper proprietors and editors, upon whom titles were also conferred in this period. The efforts of writers to organise themselves and to exert influence, as by the Society of Authors or by a British equivalent of the Academie Francaise, are analysed. Finally, the chapter looks at the rival candidatures for the most prestigious domestic literary award, the Poet Laureateship, held in this period by Tennyson, Alfred Austin, and Robert Bridges; likewise international honours, such as the Nobel Prize for Literature, which was won by Kipling but which saw nominated at different times Swinburne, Herbert Spencer, and Thomas Hardy.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.026 |
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".