Bibliographic record
Abstract
Frank Raymond Leavis was an influential, though controversial, literary critic and teacher who was raised and educated in Cambridge, England, where he eventually held a permanent academic position. In 1929, he married a student, Q. D. (Queenie Dorothy, née Roth [1906–81]), with whom he engaged in a lifelong intellectual partnership. Known for his uncompromising intellectual stances, Leavis built on the tradition of journalism-based criticism by articulating the role of the academic critic in English. After taking eight years to produce his first book, New Bearings in English Poetry (1932), Leavis published prolifically, covering topics in poetry, the novel, and English education, always seeking to address questions of the worth and objectives of reading. Leavis dedicated a large part of his career to interpretations of the work of modernist writers D. H. Lawrence and T. S. Eliot, of whom he claimed, ‘our time, in literature, may fairly be called the age of D. H. Lawrence and T. S. Eliot’; indeed, Eliot’s own critical writings from the 1930s were an important early influence on Leavis (Storer 54). Leavis had publicly antagonistic relationships with some scholars, including C. P. Snow; despite his intellectual combativeness, he is respected as one of the founders of the modern study of English literature.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.060 | 0.031 |
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".