Multiple Views of the Glimmerglass in the Coopers’ Otsego Lake Writings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Focusing on Otsego Lake, named as the Glimmerglass, this paper attempts to offer a further insight into the mode of perceiving and imagining the lake scenery. To get a full picture, the case studies include both fictional and non-fictional works, concerning three generations’ male and female perspectives from James Fenimore Cooper, his father and his eldest daughter. The specific study adopts a method of being “descriptive and phonomenological” (Hodder, 2001, p. 23). By citing and juxtaposing relative writings, it tries to relive the multiple views of the Glimmerglass and examine particularly the person’s immediate responses to the lake, which might demonstrate the decisive transformation of his or her consciousness. The study finds that although multiple views of a lake are involved in perceiving and imagining its scenery, which combine to make a full picture and bring in rich experiences, the close-up views preferred in The Deerslayer can denote more immediate responses to the lakesape, and accordingly with more engagement and even immersion in the environment an encounter of a lake might become an insider, who, with a “sympathy for mystic states” (Hodder, 2001, p. 21) might regain a sense of homecoming or dwelling.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".