MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204274935 · doi:10.5539/ells.v11n4p30

Analysis of Humbert’s Ethical Choices

2021· article· en· W3204274935 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Weihua Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language and Literature Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVladimir Nabokov Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthical dilemmaDilemmaEthical issuesPrisonSociologyPsychologyLawPhilosophyPolitical scienceEpistemologyCriminologyEngineering ethicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Humbert’s mumbling in prison shows the readers his true inner world and his tragic fate. Throughout Lolita, it is evidently clear that Humbert’s ethical choice is inextricably linked with his depressed heart and tragic fate. Based on ethical literary criticism proposed by Professor Nie Zhenzhao, this paper analyzes Humbert’s life, which is a life full of ethical choices. This article, based on Humbert’s ethical choice of Charlotte Haze, Lolita and Quilty, and his ultimate ethical redemption, reveals his ethical dilemma in ethical choice, his Sphinx Factors, the interweaving of his free will and rational will, and his ultimate ethical choice. Humbert’s ethical choices eventually led to his tragic fate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.328 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language and Literature StudiesSame topicVladimir Nabokov Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207