MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2371776687

From Realistic Narrative to Apocalyptic Narrative- Synchronic Reinterpretation of Margaret Atwood's Fiction Limited in Diachronic Genre

2015· article· en· W2371776687 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yunqi Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueScience, Economy, and Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShort Stories in Global Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPostmodernismNarrativeReinterpretationDystopiaLiteratureTrilogyContext (archaeology)IdeologyCriticismHistoryAestheticsMetafictionModernization theoryArtLawPoliticsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genre of Margaret Atwood's novel is often defined by scholars at home and abroad for its synchronic characteristics. The essay pointed out that only in diachronically limitation can her novels demonstrate synchronic genre appropriately. From 1969 to 1995,her novels reflected Canadian social realistic problems in the 70's and 80's on the one hand,criticized the situation that ideological criticism went prior to realistic context in Canada on the other hand,through which realistic narrative is proved to be her main style. From1995 to 2003,she,on the one hand,corresponded to global postmodernism,on the other hand,demonstrated characteristics of‘Canadian postmodernismwhich is different from some anti- essentialists in the postmodern Europe,and postmodern narrative led the way during this period. With the publication of Madd Addam in 2013,Margaret Atwood finished her trilogy of dystopian novels,which manifested she had already switched to apocalyptic narrative that reveals the relationship between Armageddonand global modernization.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.016
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience, Economy, and SocietySame topicShort Stories in Global LiteratureFrench-language works237,207