MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3097592580

로스트 보이와 올드 보이 : 학교 서사를 통해 『피터와 웬디』 속 소년성 읽기

2019· article· ko· W3097592580 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
김소연

Bibliographic record

Venue안과밖 · 2019
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpireNarrativeImpossibilityBoarding schoolHistoryIdeal (ethics)SociologyAestheticsLiteratureGender studiesArtAncient historyLawPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

J. M. Barrie’s novel Peter and Wendy (1911) reflects the dicourse over boyhood and boyishness presented in English boarding school narratives. In nineteenth-century English society, boyhood was closely associated with the national agenda for the imperial expansion. The figure of the boy who would not grow up was idealized as the empire replaced its vision of the mature nation with that of the nation that maintains boyish energy. By borrowing the literary conventions of boys’ boarding school narratives, Peter and Wendy both represents and questions the ideal of perpetual boyhood. On the one hand, Neverland, the setting of the novel, betrays Lost Boys’ desire to challenge the dominant discourse that glorifies growing up. On the other hand, the impossibility of remaining as boys for ever is presented through the Old Boy figure that plays a make-believe play both in Peter and Wendy and in English boarding school narratives. Through contrasting Peter Pan with Captain Hook, the Old Boy, Barrie suggests that the boarding school system led the empire’s male subjects to cling to their memories of boyhood and that boyish men’s obsession with endless play/game became the cause of innumerable deaths/losses during the wartime.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0720.013

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.203 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venue안과밖Same topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207