MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320723096 · doi:10.32920/22094807.v1

The Publication of Thomas Chandler Haliburton's The Clockmaker, 2nd Series

2023· preprint· en· W4320723096 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ruth Panofsky

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital Humanities and Scholarship
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeries (stratigraphy)George (robot)WarrantRelevance (law)PoliticsHistoryClassicsLiteratureArt historyLawArtPolitical scienceGeologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[Para.1]: "Although Thomas Chandler Haliburton wrote three series of The Clockmaker; or The Sayings and Doings of Samuel Slick, of Slickville, he is known today primarily as the author of series one, published in 1837 (although dated 1836) by Joseph Howe of Halifax. The reason for this is twofold. First, literary critics regard the second and third series as inferior to the first. Since the later series were written for a British audience, the political underpinnings of Sam's 'wise saws' lack the relevance and spontaneity of the 'soft sawder' of series one. Second, with the exception of George Parker, textual scholars have justifiably focused their attention on the editorial and bibliographical difficulties presented by the first series. Given the complexity of these difficulties, and the time and funding required for bibliographical research, it is not surprising that the second and third series have yet to receive the scholarly attention they warrant. In fact, of the three series, the second series poses the greatest challenge to the bibliographer. By examining the composition and publication history of The Clockmaker, series two, l intend to correct, in part, the current imbalance in Haliburton bibliography."

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)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
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 score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0470.014

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.145 · 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.

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Humanities and ScholarshipFrench-language works237,207