MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997117885

Attending to the Middle: George Herbert, Imagination, and the Structure of the Brain

2019· article· en· W2997117885 on OpenAlexaff
Deanna Smid

Bibliographic record

VenueEarly modern literary studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorge (robot)PoetryAestheticsArtLiteraturePsychologyVisual artsPsychoanalysisArt history
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

George Herbert appears to have had little use for the faculty of the imagination, which he calls ‘poisonous’. And yet, The Temple may have a much more nuanced engagement with the faculty, particularly because of the imagination’s mediatory role in the brain and body. Indeed, poems such as ‘The Windows’ play with the early modern English understanding of the imagination as the ambassador in the brain between sense and memory. The imagination, thought to be a physical organ in the middle of the cranium, was literally central in the brain, and was also central, this article posits, to devotional poetry such as Herbert’s.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.017
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueEarly modern literary studiesSame topicEmpathy and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207