MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415263850 · doi:10.29173/spectrum291

Exterior and Interior Injustice and Selfhood in the Poetry of Mary Robinson

2025· article· fr· W4415263850 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hannah Cline, Karen Dieleman

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature: history, themes, analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInjusticeTheme (computing)PoetryRomanceIdentity (music)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mary Robinson was a writer who made important contributions to the earliest phases of the Romantic movement. Infamous in her own time for having been the mistress of the Prince of Wales, but soon forgotten after her death, her work is largely understudied. Seeking to understand the work of this writer, this paper explores the theme of justice in Robinson’s work through a close reading of her poetry and finds her understanding of this theme shifts through her career, but is always connected to identity and selfhood. Her earlier poems suggest injustice is exterior to one’s sense of self and does not inhibit one’s ability to autonomously actualize their identity, while her later views suggest that injustice is interior to the self and can permanently inhibit the formation and actualization of the victim’s identity. Further, this paper connects events in Robinson’s life during the earlier and later phases of her writing that might have resulted in this shift in her views. In light of this research, further investigation of Robinson’s writing is necessary to advance an understanding of her unique voice in particular and the Romantic movement as a whole.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.023
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrumSame topicLiterature: history, themes, analysisFrench-language works237,207