MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114277389 · doi:10.25071/1913-9632.39579

Tricksterism, Anti-Semitism, and White Supremacy in The Education of Henry Adams: A Centennial Reassessment

2020· article· en· W3114277389 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Donald Yacovone

Bibliographic record

VenueLeft History An Interdisciplinary Journal of Historical Inquiry and Debate · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite supremacyIngenuityPoliticsRacismCentennialWhite (mutation)HistoryBiographyJudaismPolitical scienceLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Because of its place in American and world literature, The Education of Henry Adams has become enormously influential, but we have not fully understood the full scope of its impact, its subversive contexts, and Adams’s role in sustaining and furthering white supremacy. Indeed, although most of the text is devoted to the era of the American Civil War and Reconstruction, Adams never employed the term. More importantly, because of the intensity of his racism and anti-Semitism, he dismissed the era that was dominated by strife over the nation’s future and the African American role in it as one simply overwhelmed with sordid political corruption, which had its origins in alleged Jewish intrigue both in the United States and Europe. By examining the background to Adams’s work and his brilliant ingenuity, we can more fully understand what Adams sought to accomplish and how. Neither an autobiography nor a history, Adams crafted a “trickster” novel to devalue African Americans and attack Jewish life. He wrote, perhaps, the most ingenious and dangerous book of the fin de siècle.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeft History An Interdisciplinary Journal of Historical Inquiry and DebateSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207