Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bryant, Jen. The Right Word: Roget and His Thesaurus. Illus. M. Sweet. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Books for Young Readers. 2014. Print.Although it is difficult to find the ‘right word’ to describe this book, thanks to Peter Roget, it is much easier … exceptional, marvelous, superb, pleasing, or wonderful. Jen Bryant and Melissa Sweet have teamed up to write their third picture book biography, this time about Peter Mark Roget and the journey that culminated with the publication of his Thesaurus.The story takes us through the life of Peter Roget, from a shy and lonely child to a successful doctor. Peter discovered as a child that books made good friends, and he developed a love of words. Throughout his life and experiences, Peter organized words into lists, enabling him to find the right words when he needed them. With the encouragement of his children much later in life, Peter spent three more years finalizing and organizing his many lists. In 1852, his Thesaurus was published.Complimenting this story is a visual experience comprised of a collage of paintings and mixed media. The effect is entrancing, giving the eye so many wonderful treasures to discover to go along with the text. While the magic of getting the answer to a question you did not know you had may be lost on children who have never seen a Roget’s Thesaurus, it is still a delightful book. Younger children will connect with one of the many aspects of Peter’s life growing up and the wide array of illustrations. Older children will connect with deeper themes, and pour over the many facets of the mixed media illustrations. And don’t miss the timeline, author’s note, and illustrator’s note at the end!As soon as I finished the book, I immediately turned to the beginning to read through again and see what I might discover the second time through.Highly Recommended: 4 out of 4 stars Reviewer: Cindy JacksonCindy loved to read to her children as they were growing up, and now continues to impart her love of stories as a teacher with her grade six students. One of Cindy’s claims to fame is her daughter, who now carries on the tradition of storytelling with HER grade two students! Cindy is currently working on her Masters at the University of Alberta, focusing on language and literacy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.057 | 0.058 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".