Bibliographic record
Abstract
“Let desire be your destiny.” (Tagline for the movie poster) Adapting a literary classic to the screen is a no-win game. Intellectuals hate you. And the non-literary public has no idea what the big deal is about. So what is it that attracted the young Mexican director, Alfonso Cuaron, to attempt something like this, knowing that the critics lie in wait, eager to prove that Hollywood is once again behaving in a shameless manner toward high literature? Here are the answers Cuaron gave me when I put that question to him. Cuaron was approached for the 1998 Twentieth Century Fox version of Great Expectations largely because he had already directed, with great success, the adaptation of another beloved classic, A Little Princess . He began his career in 1991, with a Mexican feature, Solo con tue pareja (Love in the Time of Hysteria). This promising first film landed him a gig on the prestigious television series, Fallen Angels . Next in line was A Little Princess , the success of which (both box-office and critical) procured him a strong foothold in Hollywood. Coincidentally, part of Cuaron's preparation for A Little Princess included multiple screenings of David Lean's adaptation of Great Expectations . What he had yet to learn was that his Princess would be far more Dickensian than his Great Expectations ever had the chance to become. When Cuaron first received the script by Mitch Glazer, he was daunted by the title alone.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".