MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995451999 · doi:10.1093/cww/vps025

Transnational Poetics: Asian Canadian Women's Fiction of the 1990s

2012· article· en· W1995451999 on OpenAlexaffabout
Libe García Zarranz

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Women s Writing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoeticsScholarshipContext (archaeology)NarrativeLiterary criticismLiteratureAutoethnographyHistoryGender studiesRealmSociologyMedia studiesPoetryArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Published in 2011, the critical study Transnational Poetics engages with an eclectic assortment of texts by South Asian, Chinese, and Japanese Canadian women writers, mostly from the 1990s. Opening new spaces within the tradition of Asian American literary studies, Transnational Poetics speaks to this now established field of study, particularly within the context of Canadian literature. Drawing on pioneering work in the late 1980s, recent scholarship that includes Eleanor Ty’s Unfastened: Globality and Asian North American Narratives (2010), the collection Asian Canadian Literature Beyond Autoethnography (2008), and the special issue of the journal Canadian Literature on “Asian Canadian Studies” (Winter 2008) shows how this realm of enquiry has retained its vibrancy through the first decade of the twenty-first century. Transnational Poetics, nonetheless, focuses particularly on those Asian Canadian women writers whose work follows what the British writer Angela Carter describes in her renowned essay “Notes from the Front Line” (1983) as “putting new wine in old bottles, especially if the pressure of the new wine makes the old bottles explode” (69).

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0490.023
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary Women s WritingSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207