Bibliographic record
Abstract
photographs, journals, letters, and essays, inspiring translations, adaptations, and discussions.Given her tendency to remix and combine genres, from epistolary novels to scrapbooks, we believe Montgomery would be intrigued by the possibilities of this online platform.An online journal provides opportunities for visualizations, juxtapositions, and bricolage, transcending the capacity of print journals.We look forward to reading-and seeing and hearing!-how contributors shape this space. Reflecting on Montgomery Studies"My strongest feeling seems to be incredulity.I can't believe that such a simple little tale, written in and of a simple PEI farming settlement, with a juvenile audience in view, can really have scored out in the busy world."copyright of their work, and they, and others, can immediately share work after publication-no firewalls or embargo periods here!One of the primary benefits of open access is that content is available and discoverable online immediately.This benefits authors-citations for open-access articles are usually higher than non-OA publications-and is positive for the global Montgomery community who can immediately read, react, and engage with new publications.With Creative Commons licenses, authors allow their work to be built upon, remixed, or reinterpreted by others as long as the person doing so provides attribution to the author or creator's work.This flexibility helps foster a community of shared culture and scholarly research.There are tremendous teaching and learning possibilities here: teachers at all levels-from primary school to graduate seminars-can comfortably use the journal's materials in ways that best suit their pedagogical goals.We anticipate notyet-imagined public-engagement possibilities too, whereby we can all draw in evernew audiences to the world of Montgomery.We invite you-our readers and our potential authors and contributors-to creatively imagine and play with open access and Creative Commons possibilities and invite others to do so as well.Our editorial board includes members from across the globe who approach Montgomery from a range of methodologies and fields.The LMMI is particularly pleased to announce the journal's honorary patron, Jane Urquhart, whom we celebrate for her championing of Montgomery on national and international stages.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.026 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".