MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2601691754 · doi:10.3138/cras.2016.017

Going off the Gold Standard in Henry Miller's <i>Tropic of Cancer</i>

2017· article· en· W2601691754 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David T. Humphries

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of American Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt, Politics, and Modernism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMillerCurrencyAestheticsSociologyPolitical scienceLiteraturePhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer (1934) provides a unique modernist representation of the economic warfare of the Great Depression, as evident in Miller's claims for “going off the gold standard.” This essay explores what such claims reveal about the connections between economic regimes and the symbolic structures which underpin both cultural production and the experience of everyday life. In his depiction of prostitution and embodied transactions, Miller offers alternate modes of circulation and currency, which challenge existing economic structures and literary genres and the ways they regulate and reify conventional values. In his attempts to create a language and form that “flow,” Miller reveals how nationalism, economic strictures, and literary conventions promote hoarding, create conflicts, and mask the experience of everyday life. Miller presents individual performances and exuberant excess as an antidote to harsh economic policies in a way that speaks to today's debates about “hard currency” and the need for austerity economics.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.026
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of American StudiesSame topicArt, Politics, and ModernismFrench-language works237,207