MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529397458 · doi:10.20361/g2ws45

A Girl’s Best Friend by H.M. Savitz

2016· article· en· W2529397458 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Santana BCR

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Deakin Review of Children s Literature · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGirlReading (process)ComicsArtDancePsychologyVisual artsLiteratureArt historyPsychoanalysisPhilosophyLinguisticsDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Savitz, Harriet May. A Girl’s Best Friend. New York: Scholastic, 1995. Print. The book I am reading is A Girl’s Best Friend. I like the book because it’s sad and funny at the same time. It’s sad because she blind. There's a blind girl who has a dog has named Jessie. She also is getting sick. And they are having a hard time with money. It’s sad and funny. It’s awesome and very sad because she is blind and the dog is getting very sick.I did not like the book when the dog might die or get killed and that she is blind so she can’t see her dog but I do love the book. If I could pick one hundred I would but I can't so I will pick five. My reason is it’s an awesome book and I like the dog, it looks cute. Highly recommended: 5 out of 5 stars Reviewer: SantanaMy name is Santana I really like reading comics because it has some action in it. I am 11 years old. My favorite things to do are dance, sing, and cook. I always go to my best friend’s house because she lives very close to me. I enjoy my reading because it is comfy and fun. I really like reading comics because it’s awesome. I also like reading real life stories and my favorite book is called A Girl’s Best Friend.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3050.282

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · 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.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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