MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184781918 · doi:10.4000/ces.5279

“Let Us Give New Names to the Stars”: F. R. Scott, Dorothy Livesay, and the Power of Poetry to Move beyond Labels

2013· article· en· W3184781918 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Astrid Lohöfer

Bibliographic record

VenueCommonwealth Essays and Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRhetoric and Communication Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryArgument (complex analysis)FeelingPower (physics)CriticismExpression (computer science)AestheticsPeriod (music)SociologyEpistemologyLiteraturePsychologyPhilosophyLinguisticsArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The argument of this paper is based on the philosophical view that by changing the words and labels we use, we can discover new ways of thinking, feeling, and understanding. Lyric poets, especially during the Modernist period, often tried to convey profound ethical insights through innovative linguistic forms, an aspect that recent ethical criticism has tended to ignore. Analyzing exemplary works by two Canadian Modernist poets, I argue that an adequate appreciation of the relationship between ethics and lyric expression needs to take into account the world-disclosing potential of poetic language, i.e., the power of poetry to transcend traditional labels and to reveal aspects of the world that usually remain unexplored.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.460
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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommonwealth Essays and StudiesSame topicRhetoric and Communication StudiesFrench-language works237,207