MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391332649 · doi:10.33137/rr.v42i4.33714

Blake, Liza, ed. Margaret Cavendish’s Poems and Fancies: A Digital Critical Edition

2020· article· en· W4391332649 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lara Dodds

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMoravian Church and William Blake
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryArtArt historyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Margaret Cavendish's Poems and Fancies, completed in collaboration with thirteen undergraduate research assistants, is a major work of scholarship that promises to be useful to both scholars and teachers of early modern literature.Blake's digital edition is the first critical edition of Cavendish's poetry.In other words, it is the first to be based on a collation of all three editions (1653, 1664, 1668) and the first to include full textual notes documenting all substantial variants.Cavendish's poetry has not always been widely available, and as a result, has been less read and less studied than some of her other works.This edition changes that and will open up new opportunities for the study and teaching of Cavendish's works.Blake's edition is an easy-to-navigate

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)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and ReformationSame topicMoravian Church and William BlakeFrench-language works237,207