Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preface If the proliferation of newspapers and magazines in nineteenth-century America proved a ready market for the ambitious writer of short fictions from Edgar Allan Poe to Stephen Crane, the relative shrinking of opportunities in the story publishing media during the last fifty years of the twentieth century seems to have had no visible impact on the survival of this form. Proof of this may be found in the ShortStoryIndexpublished annually since 1951, and in another annual publication, The Best AmericanShortStories,a selection made by many notable writers over the period covered in this issue of the rearbook,including Robert Penn Warren, Raymond Carver, and Tobias Wolff. Carver once described the short story as 'the bastard stepchild of literature' but its legitimacy has long been established by practice and acceptance, so that the creative anxiety of Katherine Mansfield in the early years of the twentieth century in having to confess that she wrote 'only short stories; just short stories' now seems needlessly apologetic. At the same time, the legitimacy of the short story as a literary kind, frequently associated in criticism with the tradition of oral story-telling, never entirely quells anxieties about story's capacity to deal with large political and cultural issues, as will be seen in the preoccupations common to some of the articles in this Yearbook. Here, questions of form intersect with the ways in which American and Canadian writers engage with politics, gender issues, and the representation of the body throughout the ethnic diversity of writing in the short story over the past fifty years. Readers will find an abstract of each article at the end of this rearbook,so I make no attempt to summarize them here. I take this opportunity to thank all my fellow-contributors for their generous cooperation in this project. LIONELKELLY GUEST EDITOR ...
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.602 | 0.411 |
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".