Networks of Influence in Scottish Enlightenment Publishing
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The development of the “public sphere” and the Enlightenment are closely related to the networks of publishers involved in print culture. In Britain, a key question is whether diversity (in terms of nationality) in publishing increased over time. In this paper, we use large-scale library catalog data and a class of models known as Exponential Random Graph Models (ERGMs) to investigate the extent to which an 18th-century network of publishers in London was homophilous with respect to nationality, and specifically investigate whether those with close publishing connections to Scotland formed a separate group or if they were simply integrated into the London book market. As there is little external information on the majority of publishers, we generate node and edge attributes from the catalog data itself. The results suggest that social processes were deeply involved in the decisions behind copublishing and collaborations and that there is indeed a significant positive effect on tie formation if both nodes are “Scottish” publishers, though this lessens over the century. We find that other important factors in tie formation are edgewise shared partners and similarity in patterns of genres published.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it