Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses several contexts of literary migration in the early twenty-first century that are changing how literary scholars read, the questions we pose, and the answers we find persuasive. How do ideas travel across time and space in the internet age? How does the literary engage the social, the political, the spatial and the temporal at a time of intensifying transworld connections? How are concepts of knowledge mobilization changing what we mean by the literary and how are globalizing processes changing what we mean by migration? What is the role of English in the circulation of ideas and the creation of literary value? Understanding literacy as the meaning-making practices in which readers engage, what kind of new literacies are required in our changing times? This paper adapts the concept of transnational literacies from the work of theorists such as Gayatri Spivak to engage current debates about the digital literacies of “digital natives,” whose imaginative mobility is enabled by new media, and current literary interest in revalorizing mobility and reconsidering the material conditions that make it possible.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.028 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".