MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982571986 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v9n6p214

A Feminist Stylistic Analysis of “Broken Verses” by Kamila Shamsie

2019· article· en· W2982571986 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterary Theory and Cultural Hermeneutics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominance (genetics)Personality psychologyPhraseSentencePsychologyConsciousnessSocial psychologySociologyLinguisticsPersonalityPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research employed the feminist stylistic framework of Sara Mills in determining the difference between Kamila Shamsie’s women and men characters in her novel “Broken Verses”. The selected novel was analyzed using the model provided by Sara Mills, which aims to investigate texts at the level of word, phrase/sentence. The research identified dominant and recurring features in the novel. Women characters differ from the men in that there are more descriptions given to them which pertain to their thoughts, emotions, experiences, vulnerability towards men, and their physical characteristics. Men are described according to their physical strength, personalities, attitudes, which dominate women. Overall, the research shows that at these levels of analysis, the novel consistently foregrounds the female consciousness and experience. At the same time, the novel also magnifies the pervading dominance of men over women in many circumstances.

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.

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)0.004
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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