MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2597296161 · doi:10.5539/elt.v10n4p87

Psychological Analysis of Humboldt’s Gift from the Perspective of Lacan’s Theory

2017· article· en· W2597296161 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fang Xiang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNarrative Theory and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEducation Department of Sichuan Province
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)PsychoanalysisHonorPsychologyMaterialismLunaticPower (physics)SociologyHistorical materialismEpistemologySocial psychologyPhilosophyLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two protagonists Humboldt and Citrine in Humboldt’s gift are characterized as restless even lunatic, for they are constantly or madly seeking something such as honor, power or intimate relationship something or other. This thesis intends to analyze Humboldt and Citrine’s psychological troubles from the perspective of Lacan’s theory and reveal that Humboldt and Citrine’s psychological problem are rooted in the sense of fragmentation and lack caused by the separation from mother, and their struggle to seek safety and satisfaction is further destroyed by the industrialism and materialism prevalent in this novel.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language TeachingSame topicNarrative Theory and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207