MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414597907 · doi:10.33137/pbsc.v62i1.42797

“Chance volumes of the most miscellaneous character”

2025· article· en· W4414597907 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Heather Murray

Bibliographic record

VenuePapers of The Bibliographical Society of Canada · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian History and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersBibliographical Society of Canada
KeywordsReading (process)ColonialismFocus (optics)State (computer science)Public interest

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From 1885 to 1898, the Reverend Dr. Henry Scaddding (a polymathic Toronto cleric, local historian, and bibliophile) drew upon his extensive personal collection to curate annual book displays at the Toronto Industrial Exhibition. (These displays were staged under the aegis of the York Pioneers, and proved to be very popular.) While the annual themes differed over the years, each display was designed to demonstrate to visitors the state of “incipient lituratureism” in York (early Toronto), and the reading materials and reading tastes of the settler-reader. Scadding also used the accompanying catalogues to develop an original and somewhat eccentric theory of the operations of colonial cultural connectivity. Since Scadding had amassed perhaps the most important private library in nineteenth-century Toronto, the displays also show how he mobilized his collection for the purposes of public education. For book historians of today, the Log Shanty displays are of particular interest for their focus on reading culture and book access in pre-Rebellion Toronto.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0980.011

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapers of The Bibliographical Society of CanadaSame topicAustralian History and SocietyFrench-language works237,207