MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968252058 · doi:10.1080/0015587x.2019.1565439

<i>The Bloody Gardener’s Cruelty</i>: A Contextual History

2019· article· he· W2968252058 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueFolklore · 2019
Typearticle
Languagehe
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Crisis of the 21st Century
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMemorial University of Newfoundland
KeywordsBalladCrueltyVernacularHistoryLiteratureTRACE (psycholinguistics)Folk songArtPoetrySociologyLinguisticsCriminologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has not proved particularly easy to trace what is usually thought of as ‘folk song’ in England back into the eighteenth century. It is, however, possible in some instances to identify vernacular songs of the kind that were later recovered by folk song collectors circulating in earlier centuries in printed form, and to find contemporary references to the ways in which they were being used. This article takes this approach to one such ballad, The Bloody Gardener’s Cruelty, which was sung in England and was eventually collected in Newfoundland, but which in its earlier history strays well outside what might be thought of as the conventional folk song paradigm.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.042

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.170 · 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