MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2485556522 · doi:10.1057/9781137503626_7

‘Bizarre or dream like’: J.R.R. Tolkien on Finnegans Wake

2015· book-chapter· en· W2485556522 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Margaret Hiley

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2015
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDreamLiteratureQuarter (Canadian coin)PopularityHistoryArtLawPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is fair to say that, for most of his readers, J.R.R. Tolkien inhabits a sphere very different from that of modernist writers such as James Joyce. It is easy to forget that the two were, in fact, near contemporaries (Tolkien, 1892–1973; Joyce, 1882–1941), although none of Tolkien’s major works were published during Joyce’s lifetime, and the great rise in popularity of The Lord of the Rings and Tolkien’s subsequent fame began in the 1960s, a quarter of a century after Joyce’s death. Many scholars interested in literary influences on Tolkien seem to focus either on Anglo-Saxon and Old Norse literature, or on late Victorian mediaeval-ist texts such as those of William Morris. 1 While Tolkien has increasingly come to be seen as an ‘“author of the century”, the twentieth century, responding to the issues and the anxieties of that century’, there still remains much scope for examining his work against the background of his modernist and postmodernist contemporaries’ literary output. 2 These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
GenreOther

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 venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207