Bibliographic record
Abstract
such a journey: connections between the ontological and the historical path must be explored, and awareness that we all belong to the same 'universal homeland' must provide an ethical point of reference for a constructive approach to the par- ticulars of history" (192).Thislesson is learnt through Maraini's experience of exile and wandering, where exile has nothing to do with nostalgia and alienation but rather has much do with a notion of travel that completely discards the tourist visit: "It does not evoke melancholic nostalgia for lost origins, authenticity, and meaning; instead, it points to a place beyond «the frontiers of common knowledge» [..], where it is still possible to wander in search of «the common coordinates of humanity»" (194).Categorizing Maraini's view is not a simple task, and this is precisely Blum's point, since it is this characteristic that makes the writer so apt to reconfigure Western tradition and its relationship with the non-Western other.In chapter six Blum turns to migration literature written in Italy and contin- ues her discussion on female mobility by examining "its role in mediating the encounter between different values and cultures" (204).One of the main points of Blum's investigation in this chapter is related to the difference between integration and interaction.The clash between cultures in Italy is reflected in Blum's examina- tion of some of the literature that has been produced by female native Italians, such as Maria Pace Ottieri, and immigrant writers, such as Khadj Beye.In relation to the trope of the journey, Blum believes that the age of migration in Italy offers a new way of viewing the postmodern impasse.With Ottieri she explores the possibility of mythical thinking in an attempt to grasp the whole and living it in daily life.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.027 |
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".