MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997635855 · doi:10.22909/smf.2019.26.2.009

Possibilities of “Moments of Ordinariness” in Mobility in Dionne Brand’s Love Enough

2019· article· en· W2997635855 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Myoung Shin Kang

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Modern Fiction · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTravel Writing and Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationSociologySpace (punctuation)Perspective (graphical)Value (mathematics)Relation (database)Order (exchange)AdvertisingGender studiesPsychologyAestheticsArtSocial scienceComputer scienceVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dionne Brand’s Love Enough ponders the positionality of alienated characters in the cosmopolitan city of Toronto. Brand particularly depicts her characters in their mobile status, which is peculiar as they are restlessly moving, either physically or psychologically, while being stuck at the same time. The scholars including Sara Ahmed point out that the mobility does not always entail the positive value due to the certain circumstances that drive people into mobility. For Brand’s characters, the central cause for their static-mobility, notwithstanding the various roots of the cause, lies in their troubled body schema. This paper therefore first explores the different forms of static-mobile state of main characters in Love Enough in order to argue that Brand attempts to find the possibility for the alienated characters to negotiate their position in the city space of Toronto in the “moments of ordinariness” within the endless movement. In this brief moments, which are short but influential, the characters in Love Enough become able to reestablish their relation to the world and the people they encounter by re-viewing the same space and situation in their own perspective.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueStudies in Modern FictionSame topicTravel Writing and LiteratureFrench-language works237,207