MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3191352959

토마스 킹의 『푸른 초원, 흐르는 강물』에 나타난 가면 쓰기와 가면 벗기 - 라이오넬의 실수를 중심으로

2017· article· ko· W3191352959 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
이명하

Bibliographic record

Venue영어영문학21 · 2017
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShort Stories in Global Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTricksterMythologyWhite (mutation)IndigenousNoticeIdentity (music)IdeologyAestheticsJungleSociologyHistoryGender studiesArtLawLiteratureAnthropologyPolitical sciencePolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thomas King is one of the best-known contemporary Native writers in Canada helping provide Canadian literature with a wide range of cultural backgrounds. His second novel, Green Grass, Running Water deals with several stories about the First Nations people in a Blackfoot community in Alberta, Canada. Among the stories, the life of Lionel is especially worthy of notice with three mistakes that he had made from his childhood to middle-age. The mistakes show that he has imitated white people by disguising his Indian identity with clothes he wears, an effect of colonialist ideology which promotes white supremacy over colored people. His mistakes of the past have a lasting influence on his presence and are related to white people, which justifies the presence and role of trickster characters in the novel. With the help of the trickster, who serves as a saviour or healer in Native American mythology and literature, Lionel successfully finds his right place and purpose in his life by restoring his identity as a Blackfoot Indian. His life suggests the question of the unhealed past and its lasting influence on the present reflecting the fate of the whole aboriginal people. This analysis takes a closer look at how Lionel's masking and unmasking is portrayed as a process of healing and restoration for the whole indigenous community.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue영어영문학21Same topicShort Stories in Global LiteratureFrench-language works237,207