MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206290066 · doi:10.1093/res/hgab098

Jacob Sider Jost. <i>Interest and Connection in the Eighteenth Century: Hervey, Johnson, Smith, Equiano</i>

2021· article· en· W4206290066 on OpenAlex
Dana Lew

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Review of English Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArgument (complex analysis)Connection (principal bundle)PoliticsLiteratureEpistemologyHistorySociologyPhilosophyArtLawMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interest and Connection explores the lexical history of ‘interest’, a word that, in Jacob Sider Jost’s view, ‘scholars of the long eighteenth century have written far too little about’ (p. 5). However, this brief explanation undersells how Jost skilfully intertwines the meanings of ‘interest’ and ‘connection’ in a dynamic approach to eighteenth-century thought and understanding. While the polysemic quality of the word interest serves as the work’s focal point, Jost’s interdisciplinary argument finds connections between separate spheres of textual, political and social inquiry, which, as he explains, ‘[bind] eighteenth-century writers to each other’ (p. 10). The book weaves together four case studies of eighteenth-century figures who serve as representatives for these different spheres: John Hervey, Samuel Johnson, Adam Smith and Olaudah Equiano. Jost adopts a two-stage methodology of analysis and synthesis wherein he distinguishes between the varying significations of interest before unpacking how they interrelate. The different meanings of interest...

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.219 · 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