MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794036651

Imagining Oneness: Charting Ecological Currents in Edwin Thumboo’s Poetry

2018· article· en· W2794036651 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Arka Mondal

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œjournal of ecocriticism · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPoetry Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryRepresentation (politics)Natural (archaeology)UnificationExpression (computer science)FeelingIdentification (biology)AestheticsEnvironmental ethicsHuman lifeEcologySociologyHistoryLiteraturePhilosophyEpistemologyArtComputer scienceArchaeologyLawBiologyPolitical sciencePoliticsTheology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eco-poetry is a special kind of expression that effects an imaginative unification of the human mind and the more-than-human natural world, thereby leading/guiding the former to an alternative way of being in the world. It is an efficient system for evoking the feelings of a community. It is also an artwork that evinces the interrelatedness of all life forms and preservation of landscapes. Keeping this in view, the paper examines the unexplored poems of Edwin Thumboo to accentuate how these serve the aforementioned functions, despite the inconsistencies in the poet’s ecosophy, that is, his representation of nature as an independent, healthy place, and having spiritual significance. It discusses Thumboo’s continuous engagement with the more-than-human natural world: his identification with other life forms, expression of concern for non-human spaces, and representation of viable ecological communities in his poetry.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.027
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œjournal of ecocriticismSame topicPoetry Analysis and CriticismFrench-language works237,207