MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Entro(Poe)tics: Darkness, Decay, and the Heat Death of the Universe

2023· article· en· W4388464582 on OpenAlexaff
Sean Moreland

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Edgar Allan Poe Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicScience and Climate Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryPhilosophyLiteratureExposition (narrative)Erasmus+Art historyArtThe Renaissance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article examines Edgar Allan Poe’s engagements with nineteenth-century thermodynamic theory via his broader literary explorations of a principle of cosmic deterioration. Focusing especially on the untimely apparitions of entropy and universal heat death in “The Fall of the House of Usher” (1839) and “Mask of the Red Death” (1842), it argues that these apparitions derive from Poe’s creative responses to two primary sources. The first is Epicurean atomism, the most important exposition of which Poe found in Lucretius’s De rerum natura, as mediated by the agonistic interpretations of English natural philosophers Erasmus Darwin (1731–1802) and John Mason Good (1764–1827). The second is the energetic conception historian of science Stephen Brush calls “the wave theory of heat,” which Poe absorbed from contemporary experimental natural philosophers and popularizers of science, including Dionysius Lardner (1793–1859) and John W. Draper (1811–1882). These sources enabled Poe to conceptualize the universe as a system in which irreversible change occurs due to inevitable loss in the transmission or transformation of energy. Poe gave proleptic, poetic expression to this concept in his writings, leading to their haunting echoes in later formulations of, and responses to, entropy and universal heat death.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.020
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Edgar Allan Poe ReviewSame topicScience and Climate StudiesFrench-language works237,207