MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366809812 · doi:10.1353/rss.2010.0004

What Did Colette Know and When Did She Know it?

2010· article· en· W4366809812 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Sheila Turcon

Bibliographic record

VenueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicModernist Literature and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt historyEveningHistoryArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

February 19, 2011 (11:48 am) E:\CPBR\RUSSJOUR\TYPE3002\russell 30,2 040 red.wpd 1 “Russell and His Obituarists”, Russell 26 (2006): 5–54 (esp. 6–13). 2 Lady Constance Malleson, who was always called by her stage name of Colette, had been in a relationship with Russell since 1916. 3 Telegraph cables laid on the ocean bed allowed news agencies to send transoceanic communications; clearly, they weren’t always speedy. 4 In the Daily News, Daily Herald, Daily Express, Daily Chronicle, Daily Mirror, Daily Graphic, Evening Standard, The Star, Newcastle Daily Journal, Edinburgh Evening News, Glasgow Bulletin, Liverpool Echo, Liverpool Weekly Courier, and Sunday Express. russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies n.s. 30 (winter 2010–11): 149–54 The Bertrand Russell Research Centre, McMaster U. issn 0036-01631; online 1913-8032 WHAT DID COLETTE KNOW AND WHEN DID SHE KNOW IT? Sheila Turcon Ready Division / McMaster U. Library Russell Research Centre / McMaster U. Hamilton, on, Canada l8s 4l6 turcon@mcmaster.ca It has been several years since Kirk Willis’s article appeared in Russell.1 When I Wrst read it, I thought how could Constance Malleson (“Colette O’Niel”2 ) have believed that Russell had died from pneumonia? Willis takes her at her word (p. 8, n.4). I have Wnally decided to delve deeper, building on the evidence that Willis presents on the published reports of Russell’s death. i The reports of Russell’s death Wrst surfaced in Japan on 29 March 1921.3 From there the news spread to the United States where stories appeared in such newspapers as the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin on 21 April. Next the reports began to surface in Britain on 4 May but only as rumours; the British press was far more sceptical than the American. Willis reprints the account from that day’s Manchester Guardian and notes that the rumours appeared elsewhere.4 The last rumour of his death was printed on 8 May. Russell’s brother Frank quashed the rumours with his letter to The Times of 11 May (although the Times had never reported them). He noted that the rumours had “caused much distress” to his brother’s “numerous friends”. Willis prints Frank’s letter in full (p. 12). His denial of his brother’s death was picked February 19, 2011 (11:48 am) E:\CPBR\RUSSJOUR\TYPE3002\russell 30,2 040 red.wpd 150 sheila turcon 5 ra1 710.082740. 6 ra1 710.055420. 7 I.e. either 21 or 24 June (Oxford English Dictionaryz). 8 London: Jonathan Cape, 1931, pp. 154–6. In her unpublished revisions to After Ten Years, she replaced “of a death” with “that B.R. had died in China; I did not know that up by other British papers, including the Pall Mall and Globe, Evening Standard, Daily Express and The Nation. Frank had been contacted in mid-April. On 29 April 1921 he wrote to his brother: The American Associated Press rang me up about ten days ago to ask if it was true that you had died on 29 March in Japan. I told them that I thought it was very improbable Wrst because you wouldn’t do such a thing, secondly because you weren’t in Japan, thirdly because I should have heard if you had, and fourthly because if the news came from America there was a prima facie presumption that it was untrue. (ra1 730) Frank contacted the Chinese Legation who made inquiries for him. Subsequently he was informed that Russell had been ill with pneumonia but was recovering ; at that point Frank wrote his letter to the Times. He had also contacted Ottoline Morrell for information. She later wrote to Russell on 30 May: “We have all been wondering if you were really alive. Your brother … asked me if I had had any news of you or your death—but I could tell him nothing. I only fear you may have been very ill as I imagine there must have been something to give rise to this horrid rumour … especially I feel this as I have not heard from you for some time.”5 There is no evidence to indicate that Frank...

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.615
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell StudiesSame topicModernist Literature and CriticismFrench-language works237,207