Bibliographic record
Abstract
When Richard Wright died in Paris on November 28, 1960, scholar Michel Fabre was ready to embark on a dissertation that would deal with the life and work of the metaphysical poet John Donne. His tutor at the Sorbonne redirected his project toward Richard Wright, since a PhD dissertation, or “state thesis,” could only deal at the time with a deceased author. Such is the genesis of The Unfinished Quest of Richard Wright , Fabre’s biography that led him to found and head the field of African American Studies in France while being recognized internationally as a leading scholar on Wright. For her part, Margaret Walker, an acclaimed writer and scholar of Southern literature, knew Wright in Chicago in the 1930s where both were members of the Federal Writers’ Project and the South Side Writers Group. Her own biography, Richard Wright, Daemonic Genius , subtitled A Portrait of the Man, a Critical Look at his Work (1988), is a very personal text that contrasts with Fabre’s more traditional endeavor, shaped as the latter is by the format of the French university system.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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".