MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972600514 · doi:10.5430/elr.v8n3p25

Eclipse in Rwanda as Remembering in Pyschosocial Poetics of Trauma

2019· article· en· W2972600514 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Onyekachi Peter Onuoha

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Linguistics Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoeticsGenocideNarrativeSpanish Civil WarEclipseHistoryPoetryLiteratureSociologyLawPolitical scienceArtArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trauma exists in a synthetic mode of the referential and this is the underlying temperament in Eclipse in Rwanda. The genocide that is chronicled in the narratives of the Nigerian Civil war as recreated in Joe Ushie’s Eclipse in Rwanda foreshadows the pogrom in the mid 90s. Using Cathy Caruth’s concept of trauma as a theoretical framework, this paper examines Eclipse in Rwanda as remembering in psychosocial poetics of trauma. This paper further explicates Eclipse in Rwanda as a text of memory, which poetically captures the trauma and foreshadows the social construction of natives/ non-natives in Africa at large and in Nigeria in particular. Through the poems analysed in this paper, our findings show that Tutsis’ genocide is a poetic fulcrum for the poet to pensively recall the Nigerian Civil War and other hotspots/ narratives of politically motivated violence against fellow citizens. Eclipse in Rwanda attempts to entrench the memories of the dead in us through the poetics of remembering and by so doing indict the collective consciences of the society.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.017
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Linguistics ResearchSame topicMiddle East and Rwanda ConflictsFrench-language works237,207