MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900853539 · doi:10.1353/vcr.2017.0030

Indexes: Periodical Parts and the Bookish Afterlife

2017· article· en· W2900853539 on OpenAlex
James Mussell

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPublishing and Scholarly Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAfterlifeIndex (typography)Reading (process)Periodical literatureHistoryOrder (exchange)Content (measure theory)Set (abstract data type)HierarchyPeriod (music)LiteratureAestheticsArtComputer scienceLawMathematicsLibrary scienceWorld Wide WebPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indexes:Periodical Parts and the Bookish Afterlife James Mussell (bio) Nineteenth-century periodicals managed abundance by imagining a future. Positioned between accumulating back issues and the promise of more to come, every issue of a periodical was oriented to a moment destined to pass. Yet with pagination running from one issue to the next and terminating only with the book-like closure of the volume, the periodical was also written through with the promise of an archival life. While the individual issue was designed for readers reading in the moment, it also addressed that unknown reader who would read the periodical when bound into a book. The index was not only a crucial part of the paratext that constituted the periodical as book; it also set out how the periodical as book might be read. Like the covers of the volume, the index gathered together diverse content so that it might be grasped as a whole. Styles might have varied in the period, but every index, because it listed content alphabetically, flattened it out, disassociating articles from their position on the page and in the issue. The index, in other words, disassociated content from both the where and when of its periodical publication, instead presenting it in a repository without hierarchy in which every article was as recoverable as any other. In our digital present, we too use indexes to jump straight to articles, reading them out of order and out of time. It says a lot about how we continue to understand periodicals that nineteenth-century indexes imagined a reader who reads just like we do. [End Page 204] This faith in an archival afterlife was an integral part of the periodical as genre. The Philosophical Transactions (1665–) conceived of itself as an ongoing repository of information and so provided an index by which it might be searched, one volume at a time, in the future. This was rapidly lampooned, and publications such as The Transactioneer (1700) and Useful Transactions in Philosophy (1708–09) mocked both the tone of the Philosophical Transactions and its bibliographic apparatus (Wheatley, How To Make an Index 42). The Gentleman's Magazine (1731–1907), too, included contents pages with every monthly issue and an index at the end of its first volume. Even early newspapers such as the London Evening Post issued volume title pages (Harris 45), and some provincial weeklies had continuous pagination well into the nineteenth century. From 1811, the Liverpool Mercury, for instance, numbered its pages in a continuous sequence over each year; in 1845, it added a second set of page numbers for each issue, running both sequences concurrently until 1853. The Tenby Observer, which began in 1853, labelled each issue with an issue and volume number, something it continues to do today. Over the course of the nineteenth century, however, the newspaper divested itself of this concern for futurity, leaving only the periodical to imagine a bookish afterlife. The fecundity of the periodical press in the period was a cause for both celebration, marking as it did the spread of literacy and so culture, and alarm, as readers drowned in print, reading the right things wrongly, or, worse, the wrong things rightly (Mays 165–94; "Reading as a Means of Culture" 316–23). If it was difficult to keep up, indexes at least promised a chance to catch up, and, as long as a reader knew which volume to consult, an index could direct him or her to the relevant article. Of course, that depended on the accuracy of the index. In 1893, Eliza Hetherington, W. T. Stead's long-term collaborator, detailed some of the idiosyncrasies of periodical indexes. Firstly, there were those compiled from monthly tables of contents, usually by the periodical's printers. Most aggregated the tables into a single alphabetical list, with articles arranged under words culled from their titles (Strand Magazine used one word; New Review and Cassell's Family Magazine two or three; it was claimed that the Cornhill indexed under them all). Not only did this practice assume that titles expressed content, but it could also result in misleading entries. Hetherington, for instance, cited the index to volume 273 of the...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.230 · 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