A very large soul: selected letters from Margaret Laurence to Canadian writers A very large soul: selected letters from Margaret Laurence to Canadian writers
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
“This will be a brief letter, as I have a horrifying stack of business letters to catch up on,” wrote Margaret Laurence to her friend and fellow novelist Gabrielle Roy in 1978, echoing an earlier lament to her epistolary friend Ernest Buckler about the need to “keep pace with the ghastly flow of business correspondence.” Although she was always to face some tension between her personal and professional selves as correspondent, her priority was never in question: “Must go. I have 70 letters to reply to, having got far behind in correspondence ... am trying now to communicate once again with dear friends first, and then to answer all the others, which will no doubt be my winter project” (4 Sept. 1974 letter to Silver Donald Cameron). “This will be a brief letter, as I have a horrifying stack of business letters to catch up on,” wrote Margaret Laurence to her friend and fellow novelist Gabrielle Roy in 1978, echoing an earlier lament to her epistolary friend Ernest Buckler about the need to “keep pace with the ghastly flow of business correspondence.” Although she was always to face some tension between her personal and professional selves as correspondent, her priority was never in question: “Must go. I have 70 letters to reply to, having got far behind in correspondence ... am trying now to communicate once again with dear friends first, and then to answer all the others, which will no doubt be my winter project” (4 Sept. 1974 letter to Silver Donald Cameron).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 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