MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208034895 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14656668.v1

Age, Gender and Existentialism in the Late-Life Bildungsroman

2021· preprint· en· W3208034895 on OpenAlexaff
Laurie Petrou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicContemporary Literature and Criticism
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityCentre for Social InnovationYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExistentialismPostmodernismNarrativeMasculinityReading (process)SociologyPsychoanalysisGender studiesLiteratureAestheticsPhilosophyArtPsychologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation aims to reveal the echo of modernist existentialism in postmodern late-life fiction. In a close reading of works by Alistair MacLeod, Nick Hornby and Michael Chabon, as well as my own creative work, I have explored the continually shifting models of gender and age, as characters progress towards development and navigate questions of the self. Issues of modes of masculinity from the rural to the urban, as well as female masculinity are investigated in this sample of varying works of fiction. Grounded in an analysis of the philosophy and fiction of Soren Kierkegaard, Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus and Simone de Beauvoir, with reference to traditional Bildungsroman (coming-of age, or education novel), I hope to have demonstrated the similar, but newly interpreted existential trajectory of self-development in contemporary narrative. This is reflected in postmodern and contemporary narratives that challenge existing conventions while prizing modernist philosophical tenets. Combining theoretical and creative acumen, this work aims to contribute to age and gender studies, while offering a fresh approach to scholarly work.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.039
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.177 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicContemporary Literature and CriticismFrench-language works237,207