MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2511986382 · doi:10.7202/1036853ar

The Demand for Literature in France, 1769–1789, and the Launching of a Digital Archive

2016· article· en· W2511986382 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert Darnton

Bibliographic record

VenueMémoires du livre · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)Ancien regimeHistoryWork (physics)Art historyLiteratureArtPolitical scienceLawEngineeringPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What did the French read on the eve of the Revolution? Daniel Mornet asked this question in a famous article of 1910. Since then, historians have moved on to other ways of understanding the origins of 1789, but Mornet’s question has been left hanging, despite its relevance to recent work in fields such as the history of books and cultural history in general. This essay is intended to provide an answer to Mornet’s question while at the same time introducing an open-access website full of information about the demand for literature and the way the book trade actually operated under the Ancien Régime.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.010
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMémoires du livreSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207