MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321787057 · doi:10.1093/res/hgad015

<scp>Bernard Beatty</scp>. <i>Reading Byron: Poems</i> – <i>Life – Politics</i>

2023· article· en· W4321787057 on OpenAlex
Jonathan Sachs

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Review of English Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilippine History and Culture
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryReading (process)SubtitleSection (typography)LiteraturePoliticsPhilosophyPoint (geometry)ClassicsArtLinguisticsLawMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bernard Beatty’s Reading Byron: Poems – Life – Politics offers a dazzling series of insights from a venerable Byron scholar. Consisting mostly of well-situated close readings, the book is organized into three sections on poems, life, and politics, as indicated by its subtitle. Clusters of essays on these topics are then followed by two interviews between Beatty and his former student, Gavin Hopps, now a formidable Byron scholar in his own right. Essays in the first section on Byron’s poetry are composed for the occasion of this volume, while the other two sections offer slightly modified versions of earlier essays and lectures. Accordingly, the essays collected within each section do not necessarily contribute to a sustained claim, nor do the sections build upon each other. But that is not Beatty’s point here. Instead, he insists that while his essays seek to capture Byron’s own comprehensiveness, they ‘do not aim to be comprehensive in themselves’ (p. xv). There is, therefore, a miscellaneous quality to this volume; but when a scholar like Beatty offers a set of reflections on Byron, those interested in Byron’s work will want to sit up and take note. They will not be disappointed here.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.353
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.287 · 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