MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994379063 · doi:10.3968/11327

To Tell Trauma: Billy’s Time Travel in Slaughterhouse-Five

2019· article· en· W2994379063 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qing Zong

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in literature and language · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican Political and Social Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFantasyTime travelNarrativeAlienationPsychoanalysisPsychologyAlienLiteratureHistoryAestheticsArtLawComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five depicts a story where its male protagonist Billy has come unstuck in time and therefore travels back and forth between the past, the present, and the future and even been hijacked to an alien planet called Tralfamadore. However, under the disguise of such a sci-fi fantasy, the author Vonnegut deliberately leaves readers many hints that Billy’s time-travel experience is less a scientific fantasy than a traumatic narrative. Therefore, this article aims to explore how Vonnegut manages to make use of this time-travel story to convey the messages about Billy’s post-traumatic stress disorder and the two major causes of his traumatic experiences, and then to figure out why this master take painstaking efforts to choose this scientific time-travel story instead of conveying the traumatic elements much more directly. After the detailed analysis, a more sympathetic understanding of how badly the crucial war as well as the alienation among people can impact one’s psychological condition can be reached.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0240.018
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueStudies in literature and languageSame topicAmerican Political and Social DynamicsFrench-language works237,207