MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1962413874

BILINGUAL LITERATURE OF TANZANIA AS A SPECIFIC INTER-LITERARY COMMUNITY

2015· article· en· W1962413874 on OpenAlex
Mikhail Gromov

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Language Technology & Entrepreneurship in Africa · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCentral European Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)TanzaniaLiterary scienceLiterary theoryLiterary criticismLiteratureQuarter (Canadian coin)HistoryLiterary fictionField (mathematics)SociologyArtComputer scienceEthnologyArchaeologyMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern literary theory has created a variety of approaches to describe dynamic processes emerging in a literary field. This may be especially significant in the case of relatively young literary traditions, characterized by rather high level of dynamics. Among various theories of significance is a theory launched in the last quarter of the last century by a Slovakian scholar of comparative literature, Dionýz Ďurisin (1929-1997), who came up with the theory of the so-called specific inter-literary communities. The works of Ďurisin and other scholars, mainly from East European countries (such as Joseph Grmela, Libusa Vajdova, Irina Nikiforova, Yuri Azarov, and others) were published in the 1980s, 1990s and early 2000s in a variety of collection. KEY WORDS: literary, inter-literary, community, Tanzania.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.270 · 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