Bibliographic record
Abstract
Akulukjuk, Roselynn. The Owl and the Lemming, illustrated by Amanda Sandland, Inhabit Media, 2016.The Owl and the Lemming is a traditional Inuit fable, and is based off of Roselynn Akulukjuk’s live-action and puppetry short film of the same name. This is a simple story of pride getting in the way of a tasty dinner on the Arctic tundra.After a long winter, Lemming comes out of her burrow to gorge herself on the tasty moss. Owl, who is also hungry, sees Lemming, and blocks the entrance to her home. Unable to pass, Lemming realizes she will have to trick Owl into moving away from her home. She suggests to Owl that he lean back, and look up into the blue sky - “No way! I am not stupid!” She then suggests that Owl wait for a fatter lemming to come by - “Why would I want to wait for a lemming that might never come out when I can just eat you?” Finally, Lemming suggests they have a contest to see who can jump the highest.The book is written simply enough that it could be used for children to practice their reading, though the text size is small and compact, making pointing a challenge. The illustrations are a combination of photographs of the tundra landscape, with Owl and Lemming superimposed as cartoon figures, which makes for an odd juxtaposition. However, the cartoons do allow for Owl and Lemming to show their personalities and reactions to their respective predicaments.Overall, this is an entertaining story, and the illustrations help to root it in the Inuit tradition. This book would do well in both schools and public libraries.Recommended: 3 out of 4 starsReviewer: Andrea QuaiattiniAndrea Quaiattini is a Public Services Librarian at the University of Alberta’s JW Scott Health Sciences Library. While working as a camp counsellor, she memorized Mortimer and The Paper Bag Princess by Robert Munsch as bedtime stories for the kids. She can still do all the voices.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.039 |
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".