MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028831322 · doi:10.1136/jmh.2006.000248

Venerable or vulnerable: ageing and old age in JRR Tolkien’s <i>The lord of the rings</i>

2007· article· en· W2028831322 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Humanities · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe VenerableAgeingHistoryClassicsMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An underappreciated aspect of The lord of the rings (TLOTR) by JRR Tolkien is in how the author dealt with death, longevity and ageing in the work. During his early years, Tolkien endured first the passing of both parents and then the deaths of most of his friends during the First World War. It was not surprising that a search for the meaning of life and death became a preoccupation of Tolkien. Tolkien's Roman Catholic faith underpinned his thoughts about mortality. He also found solace in Northern myths that held that there was intrinsic worth to courage in the face of our inevitable demise. Along with his colleague, CS Lewis, he took an opposing stand to JBS Haldane, Olaf Stapledon and other precursors of transhumanists, who felt that bioengineering would allow us to extend human life span virtually without limit. Although Tolkien acknowledged the urge to try to escape our mortality, TLOTR is a story about accepting the need to let go with all of the attendant regrets and sorrow.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.218 · 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