MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1494700039

Becoming Mongrel: Grotesque Complicity in Don LePan’s Animals

2012· article· en· W1494700039 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Paul Keen

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Canadian Literature · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplicityDepictionDehumanizationDystopiaAestheticsImpossibilityNarrativeAnimal rightsPosthumanismSociologyNon-humanEnvironmental ethicsEpistemologyPhilosophyLiteratureLawArtPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Don LePan’s novel Animals, a dystopian account of a future gone wrong, is an animal story with an ironic twist. Featuring no actual animals – indeed, set at a time when there are virtually no animals left on the planet, Animals is driven by narrative tensions that disrupt enduring forms of speciesism and highlight the simultaneous necessity and impossibility of such categories. The novel converges with the efforts of posthumanist critics like Cary Wolfe, Jodey Castricano, and Donna Haraway in its depiction of the human/non-human divide and in its insistence on the philosophical necessity of including non-human animals in the designation of the Other to whom we remain morally responsible. In this sense, Sam’s experience of becoming mongrel – his descent from human, to mongrel, to raw material for consumption – epitomizes the broader dehumanization of an entire culture. By inviting readers to judge the decisions characters make in reinforcing and policing the constructed categories of mongrels and humans, LePan questions the unstable classificatory systems through which we organize physical and textual worlds.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.799

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Canadian LiteratureSame topicGeographies of human-animal interactionsFrench-language works237,207