MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2227927263 · doi:10.20361/g2ms39

Ollie & Moon by D. Kredensor and S. Kress

2011· article· en· W2227927263 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kim Frail

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Deakin Review of Children s Literature · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurpriseArtStairsArt historyNarrativeVisual artsHistoryLiteraturePsychologyCommunicationArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kredensor, Diane, and Sandra Kress. Ollie & Moon. New York: Random House ­­Children's Books, 2011. Print. Ollie loves to surprise his best friend Moon. Luckily Moon not only loves getting surprises, she loves trying to guess what they are even more. The story follows the two friends through the streets of Paris as Ollie provides more and more clues to a very big surprise. There are lots of silly interactions between the pair that are sure to amuse young children such as: Ollie surprising Moon on the toilet, Moon picking out silly hats, dancing on the Métro, and chasing a wheel of Brie cheese down some stairs. All of the characters in the story are cartoons superimposed on real photographs of Paris. Apart from Stanley the snail who provides a “Bonjour” and an “Au revoir”, Ollie and Moon are the only speaking characters. In spite of the fact that some words referencing things very specific to French culture such as fromagerie, Métro and boulangerie are sprinkled throughout the narrative or are displayed in the photographs, the location of the story is never referenced. In addition, these terms are never explained so a curious young reader would need to ask their parent or teacher or look them up on their own. When all the clues are assembled, the surprise is “round and musical, has lots of colors…fur, hooves, and feathers… is bright with lights and spins round and round”. Moon’s guess, while incorrect is presented in a very comedic image of “an elephant on a unicycle juggling animals while playing the French Horn”. The surprise actually turns out to be a beautiful carousel. Children might love the contrast of the cartoon figures against the photographic background and find the guessing game entertaining. However, from an adult point of view, the lack of context for the setting and cultural elements gives the whole story a slightly displaced feel. Recommended with reservations: 2 out of 4 starsReviewer: Kim FrailKim is a Public Services Librarian at the H.T. Coutts Education Library at the University of Alberta. Children’s literature is a big part of her world at work and at home. She also enjoys gardening, renovating and keeping up with her two-year old.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1740.119

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Deakin Review of Children s LiteratureSame topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207