Bibliographic record
Abstract
I HAVE BEEN INTRIGUED by — and, in fact, share — critics’ almost unanimous interest in what one might call the prose energies of Newfoundland writer Lisa Moore’s fiction, which includes two collections of short stories, Degrees of Nakedness (1995) and Open (2002), and a recent novel, Alligator (2005). Hers is a narrative force characterized by a magnification of emotion, an urgency of plot, and frank eroticism. Reviewers frequently note the kinetic quality of her work, using terms like “force,” “urgency,” and “power.” Critics have praised the affective quality of her writing with epithets like “breathtaking,” “invigorating,” “startling,” and “astonishing.” David Creelman, in his recent Canadian Literature review of Open, notes that Moore often does not foreshadow events. As a result, “the reader is left feeling the full force of life’s arbitrary rhythm” (170). Ffwd: Calgary’s News and Entertainment Weekly points to the astonishing quality of Alligator with references to dramatic content. The reviewer selects quotations about a “super-horny” boyfriend and an alligator “trying to tear [a] man’s head from his shoulders” to support this evaluation (paragraph 9). Astonishment is summoned up, it seems, by Moore’s efficiency in truth telling, her way of getting things just right. The Irish Examiner marvels at Moore’s “crystal clear prose,” The Globe and Mail at her “jarring insight,” The Scotsman at her ability to make the reader feel “that the glimpses you get of [characters] are the most significant, the most telling glimpses you could possibly have” (McDermid, paragraphs 7-8).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".