MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4249298342 · doi:10.3138/ecf.26.4.731

Unholy Laughter

2014· article· en· W4249298342 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Misty G. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueEighteenth-Century Fiction · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristianityModernityEnthusiasmConversationReligious beliefPeriod (music)SecularismReligious studiesGeorge (robot)ArtLiteratureHistorySociologyPhilosophyArt historyIslamAestheticsTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clerical satires with anxious depictions of religious devotion poured forth from British presses in the eighteenth century, a period of conversation about whether secularism and toleration could be seen as the hallmarks of a modern culture. The images in this essay represent this abundant clerical satire; they are drawn from the Lewis Walpole Library holdings at Yale University and were the basis of a gallery show, Sacred Satire, which I co-curated with Cynthia Roman in 2011. Through these images, I illustrate the tension between an understanding of religion as part of a traditional past and of religion as a collection of new evangelical Christian movements and practices including “human” hymns, evangelical preaching, religious life beyond the parish, “heart religion” or “primitive Christianity,” and working-class enthusiasm. Clerical figures such as George Whitefield and John Wesley loom large in the visual satires of modern religion and the implicit questions it raised about the relationship of belief to modernity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.686

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2050.101

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.184 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEighteenth-Century Fiction→Same topicReformation and Early Modern Christianity→French-language works237,207→