MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129646715 · doi:10.1353/vpr.2020.0047

Press Conflicts, Empire, and the “Closed” Periodical: Sri Aurobindo Ghose (1872–1950) and the Indian Press

2020· article· en· W3129646715 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julie Codell

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian periodicals review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonial History and Postcolonial Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpirePoliticsColonialismAudience measurementSpiritualityIndian cultureTemporalityDiversity (politics)Construct (python library)HistoryIdentity (music)SociologyPhilosophyLawPolitical scienceAnthropologyAncient historyAestheticsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay examines anti-colonial writings of radical journalist Aurobindo Ghose (1872–1950), who edited and published several periodicals between 1893 and 1921 that shaped the modern Indian press. I discuss his changing political discourses over four periodicals, at first hostile to Britain and in fierce disputes with other periodicals, then ultimately arguing that Indians construct a modern national identity apart from Britain from their pre-European history, spirituality, and culture. Considering Margaret Beetham’s comments on periodicals’ temporality, ties to readership, and generic polymorphous diversity, I suggest that political periodicals under colonialism were necessarily “closed” and resistant to diverse opinions under the stresses of empire, creating a distinct periodical culture.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0050.016
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorian periodicals reviewSame topicColonial History and Postcolonial StudiesFrench-language works237,207