Bibliographic record
Abstract
The robinsonade, a genre of literature named for Daniel Defoe’s 1719 Robinson Crusoe , features (usually male) European protagonists defeating and taming indigenous flora and fauna in various non-European locations. The female robinsonade, however, is a type of adventure literature with female protagonists that is much more interested in the nature of girls’ education and the capacity of female self-reliance. 1 It creates a space for exploring tensions between conventional notions of femininity and female aspirations for personal development. The heroine of the female robinsonade is a type of colonial girl, a European girl who must make a new home in territory that is uncharted both physically and ideologically. Given the exciting possibilities of such adventures, as well as the possible anxieties engendered by young women having to act unconventionally, it is not surprising that the colonial girl makes regular appearances in the late nineteenth-century English periodical press, particularly magazines for girls and young women. Both fiction and essays describe the experiences of British girls emigrating to one of the colonies and girls born and bred in some of those colonies; in addition, correspondence columns feature responses to girls living in the colonies and girls interested in emigration. 2 The figure conspicuously absent, however, is the Indigenous girl. 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.009 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".