MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2725890954 · doi:10.33137/pbsc.v39i2.18227

<i>Authors and Audiences: Popular Canadian Fiction in the Early Twentieth Century</i>, by Clarence Karr

2001· article· en· W2725890954 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ruth Panofsky

Bibliographic record

VenuePapers of The Bibliographical Society of Canada · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arthur Stringer-who enjoyed great literary success throughout "the 'golden age' of writing and reading, from the 1890s through the 1920s, dulring which hardcover, mass- marketed fiction flourished" (3).Karr traces the emergence of modernism in North America, the transformation of Canada into a sophisticated modern society, and gives compelling reasons for the tremendous popularity of his five authors, "the first Canadian writers to acquire international recognition" (3).Moreover, he provides an overview of contemporary practice in the publishing and film industries and challenges the elitist dismissal of popular fiction as so much pap for the masses.The task he sets himself-to write a publishing and cultural history that focuses on five key writers-is a large one that calls for a clear focus, expert organization, and incisive analysis.Despite the vast sweep of his canvas and difficulty in organizing his material, Karr succeeds admirably in articulating an important period in Canada's literary history.Karr describes his book as cultural history within the framework of "international history of the book" studies (ix).In fact, Authors and Audiences draws on the material of book history, including publishers' archives, author correspondence and journals, fan letters, and contemporary book reviews.The study is founded on an impressive selection of primary and secondary sources (cited in the book's final section, Notes) from which Karr builds his interesting history.His exhaustive research informs the thoughtful analysis of this book.Built around the careers of five writers, the work comprises twelve chapters.The first two chapters provide historical context, analyse

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)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.657

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0230.013
Scholarly communication0.0110.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapers of The Bibliographical Society of CanadaSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207