MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996840401 · doi:10.5430/elr.v8n4p27

Symbolism in V. Woolf's “Orlando” (Cognitive Tools of Figurative Thought)

2019· article· en· W2996840401 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Natalya Davidko

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Linguistics Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLinguistic and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchetypeSymbol (formal)Literal and figurative languageIdeologyThe SymbolicPeriod (music)Embodied cognitionLiteratureCognitionEpistemologySociologyLinguisticsPhilosophyAestheticsArtPsychologyPoliticsPsychoanalysisLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current research is devoted to the study of the oak tree symbolism in V. Woolf's “Orlando” (1928) with the dual purpose of defining its functional role in the literary text and educing cognitive and cultural foundations underlying conception and development of the symbol. The principles and tools employed for the analysis allow of tracing the formation of the symbolic domain of the Tree concept to the Proto-Indo-European period. Later accretions of symbolic meanings conditioned by a mythic and religious vision of the world produced a rich paradigm of symbolic attributes grounded in the primordial archetype and adapted to a new ideology. The in-depth research into textural peculiarities and semantic content of the discourses with the oak tree as a central leitmotif reveals “prominence” choices of attributes and intricate combination thereof.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.018
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 topicLinguistic and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207