MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2958675014 · doi:10.3138/ecf.31.4.727

<i>Reflections</i>: The Body in the Body of My Work

2019· article· en· W2958675014 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cynthia Richards

Bibliographic record

VenueEighteenth-Century Fiction · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLatin American Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmediacyMateriality (auditing)Cognitive reframingAestheticsSociologyValue (mathematics)Historicity (philosophy)EssentialismRepresentation (politics)Reading (process)InvocationEpistemologyLiteratureHistoryGender studiesPsychologyLawSocial psychologyPhilosophyArtPolitical scienceAnthropologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reading literature has long been viewed as an escape from the body, an edifying removal from the immediacy of experience and a necessary check on essentialism. This essay reconsiders that truism by charting the relationship between the body of a scholar and the body of her work, a journey that begins with the advent of the Iraq War and the intention to make the war present to American students by teaching the representation of war in the literature of the eighteenth century, a period of nearly continuous military conflict. That focus leads to the reframing of the value of literature as connected to its refusal to ignore bodily vulnerabilities, insights informed by the recent growth in disability studies, body studies, and trauma theory as well as the writer’s own awareness of her body’s vulnerabilities. The essay concludes by arguing that scholars can engage the materiality of bodies without forfeiting historicity or the storied virtues of literary “disinterestedness,” and that bodies matter when we read, particularly to the bodies that read in the here and now.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEighteenth-Century FictionSame topicLatin American Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207