The Relationship between Man and Animal in Ted Hughes' Poems/RELATIONS ENTRE L'HOMME ET LES ANIMAUX DANS LES POEMES DE TED HUGHES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper discusses the significance of Ted Hughes’s animal poems, and find out the relationship between human and animals. It analyses from three aspects: man expects to acquire animal power, animals reflects man and enlightenment from animals. Through the analysis, both the content and the consideration on human in Ted Hughes’ poems could be better understood. Key words: Ted Hughes, animal poems, human and animals Resume: Cet essai etudie la signification des poeme d’animal de Ted Hughes et explore les relations entre l’homme et les animaux. L’analyse s’effectue sous trois angles ci-dessous : l’homme veut acquerir la force des animaux, les animaux refletent l’homme ainsi que l’homme s’inspire des animaux. A travers cette analyse, la signification et la consideration sur l’homme des poemes de Ted Hughes pourraient mieux comprises. Mots-Cles: Ted Hughes, poemes d’animal, homme et animaux
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".