MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011586395 · doi:10.1016/s0362-3319(00)00072-0

The pursuit of happiness: A study of Alice Munro’s fiction

2000· article· en· W2011586395 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carol L. Beran

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Social Science Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShort Stories in Global Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHappinessIdeal (ethics)FaithTheme (computing)SociologyAestheticsReligious studiesLawPhilosophyTheologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The theme of happiness in the short fiction of Alice Munro evokes four contexts of signification. Contemporary North American popular culture holds happiness as a realizable but elusive ideal. In the generic conventions of fiction, happiness functions as a goal and as a sign of closure; stories end when the characters get married and live happily ever after. Thomas Jefferson (1776/1962) Hoy, H. (1991). Alice Munro: “Unforgettable, Indigestible Messages.” Journal of Canadian Studies, 26(1): 5–21. [Google Scholar] declared the pursuit of happiness, together with life and liberty, to be unalienable, God-given rights; modern commentators hold that the difference between “peace, order, and good government” and “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” encapsulates a key distinction between the cultures of Canada and the United States. Religious and philosophical traditions identify happiness with faith and the highest good. This essay considers how these four contexts of happiness operate within Alice Munro’s fiction, using her story “White Dump” from the collection The Progress of Love as an example.

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)0.009
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0270.016
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.283
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations2
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Social Science JournalSame topicShort Stories in Global LiteratureFrench-language works237,207