MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W568029315 · doi:10.1057/9780230316577

The masculine middlebrow, 1880-1950 : what Mr. Miniver read

2011· book· en· W568029315 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kate Macdonald

Bibliographic record

VenueGhent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) · 2011
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian History and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiddlebrowNationalismPoliticsLiteratureHistoryGender studiesResistance (ecology)ArtArt historySociologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acknowledgements Notes on the Contributors Introduction: Identifying the Middlebrow, the Masculine and Mr Miniver K.Macdonald Reading Class, Examining Men: Anthologies, Education, and Literary Cultures S.McPherson The Evolution of the Masculine Middlebrow: Gissing, Bennett, Priestley C.E.Hill 'Watching the Papers daily in Fear and Trembling': the Boer War and the Invention of Masculine Middlebrow Literary Culture J.Wild Professionalism and the Cultural Politics of Work in the Sherlock Holmes stories C.Clarke From Holmes to the Drones: Fantasies of Men without Women in the Masculine Middlebrow N.Humble Healing Landscapes and evolving Nationalism in interwar Canadian Middlebrow Fiction of the First World War A.Tector 'Everybody's Essayist': on Middles and Middlebrows C.Pollentier Modernity and the Gendering of Middlebrow Book Culture in Australia D.Carter 'Mind's Middle Distances': Men of Letters in interwar New Zealand C.Hilliard The Political Middlebrow from Chesterton to Orwell A.Vaninskaya 'The Collaborator, the Tyrant, and the Resistance': The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe and Masculine Middlebrow England in the Second World War A.Rea Bibliography Index

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations19
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGhent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University)Same topicAustralian History and SocietyFrench-language works237,207