Premodern Ecologies in the Modern Literary Imagination. Edited by Vin Nardizzi and Tiffany Jo Werth
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What does premodern literature have to offer twenty-first-century conversations about the environment? Since 1610 was recently (and controversially) proposed as a possible start-year for the Anthropocene, this question has never been more pressing. And this collection, edited by Vin Nardizzi and Tiffany Jo Werth, attempts to answer it through a series of case studies in “situated knowledge” (5) or rather “conversations from different hubs in time and space” (10), which trace a few of the ways in which the “freighted and imperfect” (9) category of the premodern has sustained some strands of environmental thinking throughout history. These conversations, initiated at a 2015 symposium inspired by Ursula K. Heise’s theory of “eco-cosmopolitanism,” approach premodern literature from a dizzying array of historical and geographical perspectives. Contributors hail from New Zealand, Canada, Australia, England, South Africa, and the United States and tackle topics ranging from medieval manuscripts to seventeenth-century astrolabes, from Victorian neogothic architecture to local California viticulture. Shakespeare, a key figure for most premodern ecocriticism, is refreshingly sidelined for much of the collection.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it