MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971622467 · doi:10.1353/esc.0.0070

Turning the Pages: Rereading Atwood’s Novels

2007· article· en· W1971622467 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Nathalie Cooke

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish studies in Canada · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative Fiction
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppealDismissalOrder (exchange)Plot (graphics)LiteratureHistoryArtComputer scienceLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

D     " " is often taken as an insult: a dismissal of the book on the grounds that its primary, and possibly only, appeal is at the level of plot.But all fi ction attempts to appeal to its readers, and those readers should be tempted to turn the pages.In the case of Margaret Atwood's fi ction, however, readers are tempted to turn the pages both ways.Her fi ction urges fi rst-time readers forward, forward toward richly satisfying, if not entirely conclusive, moments of closure.But her fi ction also demands readers to turn backwards, to turn the pages in the other direction as well: to go back to read again and reassess in light of the new insights they have gleaned as they have read forward. ink, for instance, of the diff erence between a reader's fi rst encounter with Off red in  e Handmaid's Tale and that same reader's return to the novel once s/he understands that Off red's story has been pieced together by the insidious Pieixoto.Similarly, with each new addition to the œuvre of this prolifi c author, while readers fi nd themselves moving on to meet new fi ctional characters and landscapes, they also fi nd themselves returning, turning back as it were, to earlier Atwood works in order to read those works through a new lens and with new insights.Take, for example, Blind Assassin, which,

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.737
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0230.020
Scholarly communication0.0130.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish studies in CanadaSame topicUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative FictionFrench-language works237,207