MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1945390789 · doi:10.20360/g2ms34

Poetry and New Media: In Conversation with Four Poets

2011· article· en· W1945390789 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Janette Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage and Literacy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiteracy, Media, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryAffordanceConversationLiteratureLiteracyLinguisticsArtSociologyComputer sciencePedagogyPhilosophyHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through an examination of digital poetry explorations created by the researcher based on conversations with four Canadian poets, this paper explores the convergence of poetry and new media and attempts to address what happens when the pedagogical ideals outlined by the poets are represented digitally. The poets and researcher discuss the affordances the digital poetry explorations might offer a potential reader or aspiring writer.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.267
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0400.051
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLanguage and LiteracySame topicLiteracy, Media, and EducationFrench-language works237,207