MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Romanticism

2015· other· en· W4248104838 on OpenAlexaff
Joel Faflak

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Encyclopedia of Victorian Literature · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature: history, themes, analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomanticismRomancePhenomenonLiteratureVictorian literatureHistoryArtPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The traditional divide between the Victorian and the Romantic periods appears less distinct once we examine the influence and transference between Romantic and Victorian writers and their texts. The Victorian reception of Romantic literature, for its unavoidable literary and cultural response to history – specifically, one determined by the epochal events surrounding 1789 – is at once an attempt further to clarify the Romantic achievement and a phenomenon crucial to Victorian literature's self‐definition. This struggle inevitably determined subsequent critical receptions of Romantic literature, but it needs to be examined on its own terms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.007

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Encyclopedia of Victorian LiteratureSame topicLiterature: history, themes, analysisFrench-language works237,207