MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003481952 · doi:10.33774/apsa-2020-84blb

Teaching Western Political Thought Through Western Literature

2020· preprint· en· W3003481952 on OpenAlexaff
Douglas A. West

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Science Research and Education
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDystopiaUtopiaPoliticsIdeologyPower (physics)Western literaturePresentation (obstetrics)HistoryPerspective (graphical)SociologyAestheticsPolitical scienceMedia studiesLiteratureArt historyLawPhilosophyArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this presentation I will begin by situating and accounting for my pedagogical decision to teach the Fall 2019 section of Modern Political Thought, through the lens of Western-European literature. This course focuses on the use of the novel in Western-European culture as a commentary on contemporary political experiences. For example, the novels that will be covered in this course aim to convey to the reader the power of political will, utopia and dystopia, ideological bias, gender politics, religion and civic engagement, among other political themes. Throughout the course we will read these books as they speak to their time and to our own, encouraging an historical perspective on the development of Western – European political ideas. The texts under consideration include; Utopia. Thomas More, Frankenstein. Mary Shelley, Darkness at Noon. Arthur Koestler, Continental Drift. Russell Banks, Linden Hills. Gloria Naylor

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.024
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolitical Science Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207