Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reason we wanted to host articles on New Literature is already a question of a bias or a sense of importance indicated by the history of academic interest in the literature in English.It is also an imperialistic event.The conventional English department, itself an imperialist legacy and forbearer of Anglophone imagination, already faces a dilemma of choice created by the literature produced by the settlers and the colonized peoples in the former colonies of England before the British literature.In one of the most ironical events of the last few centuries, the English language has not only been transformed into a number of variants characteristic of culture and geography of the places far from England, it has also been mutated into tools for creative expressions.In this, the rise of the settlers' English in various parts of the world like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa points to an important historical fact for English literature.The fact that New Literature in the settlers' new kind of English is an extension or expansion of English literature implies an evolutionary aspect of survival or growth beyond the political and economic process of colonization.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.070 |
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".