MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203354639 · doi:10.1093/hwj/dbab028

Malcolm Chase (1957–2020)

2021· article· en· W3203354639 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fabrice Bensimon, Rohan McWilliam

Bibliographic record

VenueHistory Workshop Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVietnamese History and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupporterSorrowPolitical radicalismPoliticsFeelingTone (literature)HistoryQuarter (Canadian coin)SociologyMedia studiesLawArtPolitical sciencePsychologyLiteratureSocial psychologyGenealogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malcolm Chase, who has died aged sixty-three, was a strong supporter of History Workshop and a great embodiment of its ideals. He was steeped in the work of E. P. Thompson and cared passionately about history from below. One of the distinguishing features of Malcolm’s work was his deeply felt commitment to reconstructing the lives of the poor and taking their politics seriously. Like Thompson, he was particularly strong on the tone of workers’ voices in the past. In a remarkably productive career, over the last quarter century, he became an important historian of nineteenth-century British radicalism and the leading authority (in a crowded field) on Chartism. Heavily committed to adult education, he was a gifted teacher and mentor to a large number of students. In his funeral address for Malcolm, Robert Poole noted that the same words would often come up when people spoke about him: ‘inclusive, generous, open-minded, careful, engaging, insightful, humane’. The sorrow felt by friends, colleagues and readers following his death expresses the feeling that a major historian and an empowering presence in the life of the scholarly left has now gone.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.017

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistory Workshop JournalSame topicVietnamese History and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207