MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338788478 · doi:10.20361/g2bk5h

Dream Boats by D. Bar-el

2013· article· en· W2338788478 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Linda Quirk

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Deakin Review of Children s Literature · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDreamMetaphorFolkloreJunglePleasureHistoryMythologyNarrativeVisual artsArt historyAestheticsArtSociologyLiteraturePsychologyArchaeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bar-el, Dan. Dream Boats. Illust. Kirsti Anne Wakelin. Vancouver: Simply Read Books, 2013. Print.This is a gorgeously illustrated book which offers readers the opportunity to “float” in a dream boat, travelling deep into the richly-embroidered dreams of children from different lands and varying traditions. The words and images transport us high into the Andes and deep into the rainforests of Haida Gwaii; they take us to the beach in Mumbai and into the city of St. Petersburg; they float on the Niger and sail on the Yangtze. The dream metaphor works well for what is frequently a confusing journey through time and space, through personal narrative and shared folklore, and through the walls that divide us. The central dream of the book is a deeply multicultural dream. One can applaud the author’s intent more than his accomplishment, for it is just a little bit too easy to become quite lost in this dream world in which so many myths and folktales are represented as amalgams or approximations. The saving grace is that the author has inspired the illustrator to visualize an exquisite dream world in which it is a genuine pleasure to be lost.The publisher recommends this book for readers from 4-8 years of age, and this makes sense except that it is difficult to imagine that most children of this age will have enough geographical knowledge or multilayered cultural contexts to grasp the overriding point in even a superficial way.Recommended: 3 out of 4 stars Reviewer: Linda QuirkLinda is Assistant Special Collections Librarian at the Bruce Peel Special Collections Library at the University of Alberta.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1660.159

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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