Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are two views about survival in Laurence’s fictional world; one is pessimistic, the other is optimistic. Clearly pessimistic are the characters’ survival conditions such as unwholesome climate, unproductive soil, oppressive society, racial prejudice, and their weak minds which cannot adapt themselves to these environments. These elements bring a pessimistic atmosphere to her fictional world. But most of her characters are free, little by little, from this pessimistic atmosphere to take a quiet mind to stand against their bad environments as the fiction goes to its end. Laurence asks us not to give up hope in this rough world. In her novels Laurence describes the dangerous and threatening world to show a strenuous protagonist who begins a new start with an optimistic mind. Laurence describes the desperate surroundings to show a strong mind which overcomes the threats to death, the sufferings, the alienation and solitude, the meaninglessness, and gets a spiritual awakening to get over all the outward hardships. Laurence is a typical Canadian writer who describes the lives of the first immigrants to Canada and their offsprings. So her fictional world can give us an important clue to understand the other Canadian writers such as Ernst Buckler and Hugh MacLennan. In these writers we also can find the optimistic mind to stand against and overcome the desperate surroundings. So, Magaret Atwood and Gail MacGregor who argue that Laurence is a pessimistic writer wrong, because both of them fail to see the character’ new start in spite of outward hard ships.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.175 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".