MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1651737757 · doi:10.15210/interfaces.v5i1.6501

REVISITANDO WOUNDED KNEE EM GREEN GRASS, RUNNING WATER.

2012· article· pt· W1651737757 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elisa S. Thiago

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2012
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShort Stories in Global Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomanceNarrativeArtBattleHumanitiesHistoryLiteratureAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este trabalho investiga de que maneira a história tem sido colocada dentro da literatura, no caso específico do texto literário pós-moderno. As complexidades de troca entre história, ficção (estória) e narrativas de vida em Green grass, running water são analisadas a partir de uma série de formulações. O “Massacre de Wounded Knee”, Dakota do Sul, de 1890, e seu desdobramento, a “Batalha em Wounded Knee”, que ocorreu na década de 1970, são os episódios históricos analisados a partir da perspectiva metaficcional, pós-modernista, apreendida no romance acima citado, do escritor indígena canadense Thomas King.Abstract: This paper investigates how history has been placed within literature, in the specific case of the post-modern literary text. The complexities of the exchange between history, fiction (story) and life narratives are analysed as they appear in Green grass, running water from a series of formulations. The “Massacre at Wounded Knee,” South Dakota, of 1890, and its redoubling, the “Battle at Wounded Knee”, which took place in the 1970s, are the historical episodes analysed from a metafictional, post-modern perspective, as apprehended in the above mentioned novel by the Canadian native writer Thomas King.

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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

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 studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicShort Stories in Global LiteratureFrench-language works237,207