MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969984868 · doi:10.1215/0961754x-7312501

The Making of a Counter-Culture Icon: Henry Miller’s Dostoyevsky by Maria Bloshteyn

2019· article· en· W2969984868 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joseph Frank

Bibliographic record

VenueCommon Knowledge · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSecurity, Politics, and Digital Transformation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconMillerCitationComputer scienceArtWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Book Review| April 01 2019 The Making of a Counter-Culture Icon: Henry Miller’s Dostoyevsky by Maria Bloshteyn Bloshteyn, Maria, The Making of a Counter-Culture Icon: Henry Miller’s Dostoyevsky (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2007), 261 pp. Joseph Frank Joseph Frank Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Common Knowledge (2019) 25 (1-3): 442–444. https://doi.org/10.1215/0961754X-7312501 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Joseph Frank; The Making of a Counter-Culture Icon: Henry Miller’s Dostoyevsky by Maria Bloshteyn. Common Knowledge 1 April 2019; 25 (1-3): 442–444. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/0961754X-7312501 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsCommon Knowledge Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright © 2019 Duke University Press2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.015

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueCommon KnowledgeSame topicSecurity, Politics, and Digital TransformationFrench-language works237,207