Community in contemporary British fiction from Blair to Brexit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"Examining how British writers are addressing the urgent matter of how we form and express group belonging in the 21st century, this book brings together a range of international scholars to explore the ongoing crises, developments and possibilities inherent in the task of representing community in the present. Including an extended critical introduction that positions the individual chapters in relation to broader conceptual questions, chapters combine close reading and engagement with the latest theories and concepts to engage with the complex regionalities of the United Kingdom, with representation of writers from all parts of the UK including Northern Ireland. Including specific focus on the most challenging issues for community in the past five years, notably Brexit and the Covid-19 crisis, with a broader understanding of themes of local and national belonging, this book offers detailed discussions of writers including Ali Smith, Niall Griffiths, John McGregor, Max Porter, Amanda Craig, Bernadine Evaristo, Jonathan Coe, Bernie McGill, Jan Carson, Guy Gunaratne, Anthony Cartright, Barney Farmer, Maggie Gee and Sarah Hall. Demonstrating some of the resources that literature can offer for a renewed understanding of community, this book is essential reading for anyone interested in how British Literature contributes to our understanding of society in both the past and present, and how such understanding can potentially help us to shape the future."--
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".