MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W332779533 · doi:10.20361/g2fp43

How Do Dinosaurs Say I’M MAD? by J. Yolen

2014· article· en· W332779533 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Debbie Feisst

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Deakin Review of Children s Literature · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Collection Development and Digital Resources
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSisterFeelingPower (physics)ArtVisual artsAestheticsHistoryArt historyPsychologySociologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Yolen, Jane. How Do Dinosaurs Say I’M MAD? Illus. Mark Teague. New York: Scholastic-The Blue Sky Press, 2013. Print.This book about misbehaving dinosaurs is one of the most recent from the How Do Dinosaurs… series (of over 20 titles) power-duo of Jane Yolen and Mark Teague. Multiple award winning author Yolen and illustrator Teague have created a how-to manual of sorts to help the littlest people, as well as adults, learn to control our tempers.The dinosaurs in this story, who will be very familiar to fans of this series, are feeling angry due to many reasons; the Barapasaurus is upset about something he cannot have (his sister’s tricycle); the Afrovenator has been asked to sit still but he is having none of that; and the Lystosaurus does not want to go for a nap. They react with tantrums and terrible dino behavior that many young readers may see reflected in themselves: banging of toys, stomping, throwing things, and pouting.The bad behaviours are then tempered with calming techniques; counting to 10, breathing calmly, cleaning up, saying sorry and giving hugs. Of course the outcome is not always so easily achieved with real children! Mark Teague’s illustrations are very expressive, so much so that my 5-year-old was upset by the menacing and angry looks that the parents directed towards their dinosaur children in most of the images. Luckily of course by the end of the book both parent and child have resolved the issues. While the familiarity of the characters in this book may be a draw for some readers, it can also create a sense of formulaic repetition for adults. Recommended for public and school libraries.Recommended: 3 stars of out 4 Reviewer: Debbie FeisstDebbie is a Public Services Librarian at the H.T. Coutts Education Library at the University of Alberta. When not renovating, she enjoys travel, fitness and young adult fiction.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.172

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.044

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Deakin Review of Children s LiteratureSame topicLibrary Collection Development and Digital ResourcesFrench-language works237,207