Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article describes the major trends and events in Dostoevsky studies in North America in the past five years. It begins by providing an overview of notable scholarship in the last five years as well as forthcoming: these include works informed by a philosophical perspective, those which deal with narrative form, and those rooted in contemporary discourse, as well as new computational methods. It also discusses works which are aimed at students, teachers, and general readers of Dostoevsky. The article then goes on to provide a discussion of the history and organization of the North American Dostoevsky Society and the public outreach events and scholarly activities that it organizes, including its popular blog, Bloggers Karamazov. It also provides a summary of the transnational online program organized by the Society and other organizations for the 2021 Dostoevsky bicentenary, which include a lecture series and a birthday party. Finally, the article touches on global connections enabled by new technology and the future of Dostoevsky studies in North America, in particular the website of the International Dostoevsky Society and the online transfer and update of the Society’s bibliography into a research portal hosted on that website.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".