MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795436176 · doi:10.22215/etd/2014-10621

Indirection and Character in "Song of Myself"

2014· dissertation· en· W2795436176 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Sörensen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPoetry Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndirectionPersonalityPoetryCharacter (mathematics)Representation (politics)Reading (process)LiteraturePsychologyPhilosophyArtAestheticsLinguisticsPsychoanalysisComputer scienceMathematicsLawProgramming languagePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the 1980's and 1990's, a number of critics came to the conclusion that Whitman aspired to an unmediated act of poetic self-representation. I revisit this conclusion, arguing that although it is true Whitman considered his poetry an extension of his personality, he also believed personality is ineffable, and as such avoids exposing it to engaged representation. Instead, he proceeds according to his theory of "indirection"--that is, the poem does not represent his personality as such, but rather evokes a vague atmospheric quality meant to approximate the peculiar resonance of his own personality. I inquire into the specific means available to Whitman's indirect method, as well as the challenges indirection presents to dominant reading practices.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.788
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPoetry Analysis and CriticismFrench-language works237,207