Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article contextualizes 1865 as a key moment in global history and in the world of the British Empire. Central to this discussion is a theorization of the concept of keydates, which is developed through a reconsideration of Raymond Williams’ important cultural studies text Keywords. Taking 1865 as an important keydate, the authors examine how temporality as an organizing hermeneutic and as a site of study might function to reorient discussions in specific fields of area studies and reimagine fixed projects (those of the nation, empire, identity, genre, geography and so on). The authors also explore the uses of the concept of disenchantment of empire as a way of contextualizing the sensibility of the age of the late 19th century and 1865 in particular. However, this work marks out an important distinction between the disenchantment of empire and Max Weber’s question of the ‘disenchantment of the world’. If the disenchantment of the world is about rationalization and secularization, the authors suggest disenchantment of empire as a possibility for rethinking structures of empire in terms of disorienting outcomes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".