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

Elizabeth Gaskell’s shorter pieces

2007· book-chapter· en· W2503111944 on OpenAlexaff
Shirley Foster

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0570.015

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicShort Stories in Global LiteratureFrench-language works237,207