MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1572789850

The Body as a Figurative Code in Luo Popular Culture, Vernacular Literature, and Systems of Thought

2010· article· en· W1572789850 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Benjamin M. O. Odhoji

Bibliographic record

VenuePostcolonial text · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiteral and figurative languagePremiseArgument (complex analysis)Vernacular cultureCode (set theory)Popular cultureVernacularSociologyFeelingAestheticsLinguisticsPsychologyAnthropologySocial psychologyArtPhilosophyComputer scienceMedia studies
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Popular culture is commonly viewed as a process of producing meanings from social experience as well as the way such meanings are expressed by respective groups of people in their daily lives. Popular culture (as opposed to high culture) may be viewed as folk culture that is favored by many people. This notion of popular culture encompasses a people's systems of thought and also embraces the cultural meanings that are woven into their language. The premise of my argument is that according to Luo popular culture , oral literature, and systems of thought, the human body is deployed as a figurative code for modes of thought, feelings, and characteristics that do not coincide with English idiom. The Luo people's conception of self and person-hood is therefore, quite different from Western systems of thought.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.031
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePostcolonial textSame topicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207