Snapshots of the California desert, sketches of the British Columbia rainforest : an ecofeminist reading of Mary Austin's and Emily Carr's short prose
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Viewed from an ecofeminist perspective, three connecting points can be identified in Austin's and Carr's short prose. Firstly, both authors employ a first-person female narrator who directly addresses the reader, recording what she has experienced and inscribing the remote western regions with female presence. Secondly, this partially autobiographical narrator functions as a field guide, describing with scientific accuracy and in photographic detail the multilayered natural rhythms of the place. Thirdly, the narrator interacts with the local inhabitants, chronicling their multifaceted stories. These parallels point at the authors' shared resolve to promote conservation of non-industrialized lands, to participate in the preservation of North American native arts, and to advance the transformation of gender relations. Moreover, by stressing the geographical as well as cultural diversity of their regions, the authors redefine the boundaries of their respective national literatures and national identities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".