Review of 'Tradition Today'. No 1, April 2011. Sheffield: The Centre for English Traditional Heritage. 71 pp.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This new e-journal in English for folklorists comes from Sheffield, and is to be seen as a new venture for Emeritus Professor John D.A.W. Widdowson, long time head of the Centre for English Tradition and Language within the University of Sheffield. [Another article in this volume of 'Australian Folklore' discusses this Centre's uneven history and sad and severe curtailment in recent years.] In addition to the succinct editorial, there are a range of articles... Clearly we are dealing here with a fine new contribution to the discipline and the folklore field, with a nice mix of the ingredients that one would expect from the unduly modest leader of regional folkloric work in England in the last forty years and more. We applaud the initiative and the dignity of a new journal which bids fair to maintain the standards so long associated with its editor, his links with Newfoundland, and his many links with the English-speaking countries where his pupils and friends have done so much for the recording of the true folk voice of the regions of the British Isles, and of England especially.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".