MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2503111944 · doi:10.1017/ccol0521846765.008

Elizabeth Gaskell’s shorter pieces

2007· book-chapter· en· W2503111944 on OpenAlex

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

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShort Stories in Global Literature
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNovellaOriginalityNarrativeVariety (cybernetics)LiteratureHistoryPublishingResistance (ecology)ArtSpace (punctuation)PhilosophySociologyComputer scienceLinguisticsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elizabeth Gaskell's fiction is beginning to receive the attention it deserves; her novels are widely available in paperback editions, several have been adapted for radio and television, and recent critical studies have helped to establish her as one of the important novelists of the Victorian period. But, curiously, her shorter pieces have been largely disregarded by publishers and critics alike, perhaps because until now many have been difficult for modern readers to access, though both T. A. Ward and Clement Shorter included most of them in their respective Knutsford (1906) and World's Classics (1906-19) editions. Gaskell's shorter works make up a considerable portion of her oeuvre: alongside her seven full-length novels and four novellas, she published more than forty short pieces, including stories, essays, autobiographical reminiscences, and travelogues. Wide-ranging in content and technique, these show Gaskell at her most original and inventive, experimenting with genre and narrative methodology, and dealing with topics which, though also explored in her novels, often have a sharper impact in the more restricted space. One reason for the relative obscurity of these pieces may be their resistance to easy grouping or classification. Their variety makes it difficult to place them in obvious generic categories - usually a publishing desideratum - and their transgressive characteristics represent a kind of literary hybridization which prevents easy definition. Yet it is this variety and originality which makes them so fascinating and so deserving of critical consideration.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.175 · 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