MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bottomless Loneliness and Despair: New Women in Winsburg Ohio

2010· article· en· W1871776516 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wang Qiushi

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolitudeLonelinessHumanitiesEthnologyArtSociologyGender studiesPsychologySocial psychologyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Though an analysis of how and why four new women in Winsburg, Ohio appear grotesque, this paper points out that grotesques actually cherish rich and beautiful spiritual world and that shackled by sex discrimination, their loneliness and despair are deeper than these of men grotesques’. Key words: Winsburg Ohio, new woman, loneliness Resume Par l’analyse des conduites excentriques des quatre nouvelles femmes dans Winesburg, Ohio ainsi que leurs raisons, l’article indique que les excentriques possedent en fait un monde spirituel beau et riche, et que, en tant que femmes, elles sont liees de plus par le sexisme et leurs solitude et desespoir sont beaucoup plus profonds que ceux des hommes excentriques. Mot cles : Winesburg, Ohio, les nouvelles femmes, la solitude 摘 要 本文通過分析《小城畸人》中四位新女性的畸人行徑及其成因,說明畸人不畸,實則是精神豐富美麗的人,而身為女性,她們比男性更多一重性別歧視的桎梏,其孤獨與絕望也更深刻。 關鍵詞:《小城畸人》;新女性;孤獨

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.660

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicArchitecture, Design, and Social HistoryFrench-language works237,207