Book Review of: Chapman, Marina. (2013). The Girl with No Name: The True Story of a Girl Who Lived with Monkeys. Edinburgh: Greystone Books.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Name," describes the compelling story of Marina's constant struggle throughout the course of her early life in Colombia, South America.As the front of the book depicts, Marina was kidnapped around the age of four years old, as she remembers, while she was out in a garden picking pea pods.Her kidnappers however, dumped her off in the middle of the jungle, abandoning her, and Marina was left to her own devices for survival.Marina's adaptation to jungle living and her will to survive at such a young age in the wild is miraculous, and Chapman answers all questions readers may find themselves wondering.For example, readers may be curious as to what she ate, where she slept, and even how she went to the bathroom without the luxuries of a toilet.Chapman candidly reveals all these details, as well as how she came to learn these strategies for surviving in the jungle, a key component of the book.The area of the jungle Chapman came to call her home was also inhabited by a tribe of monkeys, who she repeatedly called her family.As she mimicked the ways of the monkeys in her daily routines, Marina was able to find more ease in activities that were necessary, such as eating, grooming, and staying alive.Chapman reinforced the recurring theme of family many times throughout the course of the book.One can assume family remained a central theme due to her childhood that lacked the
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.181 | 0.143 |
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".