MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407538123 · doi:10.20361/g2t61j

Painted Skies by C. Mallory

2016· article· en· W2407538123 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Sandy Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Deakin Review of Children s Literature · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual artsArtShot (pellet)Reading (process)Art historyThe arcticHistoryLawGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mallory, Carolyn. Painted Skies. Iqaluit, NU: Inhabit Media, 2015. Print.The northern lights, or aurora borealis, are ethereal and difficult to reproduce in an image, however, illustrator Amei Zhao does an admirable job. Carolyn Mallory’s story, told through the voices of two girls, Leslie and Oolipika, is a simple one encompassing the tradition that the northern lights are spirits playing a soccer-like game and that if they come too close, you might be hit by the ball. To let the spirits know you are there, you click your fingernails together. The Arctic environment is present throughout. When Leslie jumps she is “all arms and legs like a young caribou”. When the girls make snow angels they move their arms and legs “as if they were ptarmigans trying to get off the ground”. The reading level is appropriate for a picture book. While the story is well-written, it is the artwork on which the story is printed that is the best part of this volume. All of the pages are night pictures, so the images are shadowed, with highlights of moonlight. The deep blues, blacks, purples and greens contrast with the pinks and lime greens of the northern lights. Zhao has also added whispy green figures of the auroral spirits running through the sky. While this is a simple book, it is another example of Inhabit Media’s excellent work in capturing Arctic stories and creating high quality publications with them. This book is highly recommended for elementary school libraries and public libraries.Highly recommended: 4 stars out of 4Reviewer: Sandy CampbelSandy is a Health Sciences Librarian at the University of Alberta, who has written hundreds of book reviews across many disciplines. Sandy thinks that sharing books with children is one of the greatest gifts anyone can give.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Deakin Review of Children s LiteratureSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207