MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954314516 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp.13370

Becoming by Returning Home in The Wondrous Woo

2019· article· en· W2954314516 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Yiwen Tao

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThouSociologyFlourishingHumanityAestheticsGender studiesPolitical sciencePsychologyLawSocial psychologyPhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Carrianne K. Y. Leung’s novel The Wondrous Woo, the 1.5 generation – those who were born elsewhere but came to Canada at an early age – represent the challenge of becoming through returning “home.” The uneasy marriage of becoming and homecoming that runs through the novel is decisively realistic. Woo blends elements of magic with realism only to reject romanticized rhetoric and advocate for the urgency of truth-telling and social empowerment. By juxtaposing different stories of becoming with various forms of homeward struggles, the novel gives expression to the transgenerational traumas and challenges that beset the 1.5 generation in the depths of their “homelessness.” In part, this challenge surrounding their becoming is a social one. Through its themes of homelessness, self-parenting, and mental illness, the novel details the struggles of Chinese immigrant families as they are handicapped by a lack of social knowledge. Unfolding around the efforts of the Woo children to transcend their immigrant backgrounds and negotiate empowerment and flourishing away from hostile social forces, the novel ends on a note of hope, suggesting that the hardships that the 1.5 generation endure can lead to a rich and fulfilling life. I will discuss the notions of home and belonging in the novel by bringing Martin Buber’s I and Thou and Kantian ethics in tandem, arguing that wherever an I-Thou bond develops, the formula of humanity is guarded, and home becomes possible.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0130.017
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207