Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resume: A partir de deux classiques contemporains, Fifi Brindacier (1945) d'Astrid Lindgren et Jacob Deux-Deux et le dragon (1975) de Mordecai Richler, l'auteur explore les identites nationales suedoise et canadienne. L'elaboration du personnage principal reflete des caracteristiques geographiques, historiques et culturelles propres a chacune d'entre elles. Or, malgre certains traits communs comme l'âge, l'independance d'esprit et la contestation de l'autorite, une difference fondamentale se fait jour, laquelle ne petit s'expliquer que par un particularisme de l'identite nationale: Fifi est deja un personnage fort qui n'a aucun desir degrandir, tandis que Jacob souhaite grandir et acquerir la force d'un adulte. Summary: The paper investigates Canadian and Swedish national identity, taking as a point of departure two contemporary classics: Pippi Longstocking (1945) by Astrid Lindgren and Jacob Two-Two Meets the Hooded Fang (1975) by Mordecai Richler. The construction of each novel's central character reflects significant geographical, historical and cultural aspects of Swedish and Canadian national identity. Despite many similarities between the two characters, for example their age, independence and rebellious attitude toward authority, their profound difference can only be accounted for by the national identity they express; Pippi is already strong and has no desire to grow up, whereas Jacob wishes to grow up into adult strength.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".