MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Note: The 1832 Cholera Epidemic and the Book Nathaniel Hawthorne Never Wrote

2021· article· en· W4249690038 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laurie Lico Albanese

Bibliographic record

VenueNathaniel Hawthorne Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryCholeraLiteratureArt historyClassicsArtMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract On June 28, 1832, Nathaniel Hawthorne penned a letter to Franklin Pierce describing plans for a Northern tour through New York into Canada, a trip that he was forced to postpone due to the 1832 cholera outbreak in Montreal. Hawthorne intended to gather tales for The Story Teller on this ill-timed trip, but the trip was never made and the collection of interlinked traveling tales never published. The author of this note paper considers the cholera epidemic's impact on Hawthorne's writing life and how it reverberates through her own writing of historical fiction during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNathaniel Hawthorne ReviewSame topicHistorical and Scientific StudiesFrench-language works237,207