Jacob Sider Jost. <i>Interest and Connection in the Eighteenth Century: Hervey, Johnson, Smith, Equiano</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".