MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229712696 · doi:10.1353/bcc.2010.0119

Lost Boy: The Story of the Man Who Created Peter Pan (review)

2010· article· en· W4229712696 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Deborah Stevenson

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the Center for Children's Books./Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHistoryPsychoanalysisPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Lost Boy: The Story of the Man Who Created Peter Pan Deborah Stevenson Yolen, Jane . Lost Boy: The Story of the Man Who Created Peter Pan; illus. by Steve Adams. Dutton, 2010. 40p. ISBN 978-0-525-47886-7 $17.99 Ad Gr. 3-4. This straightforward picture book-style biography of Peter Pan author J. M. Barrie chronicles his childhood in Scotland, his early writerly attempts, his move to London, his burgeoning success as a playwright and novelist, and the creation and legacy of his best-known work. Along the way, it documents his friendship with the Llewelyn Davies children, who collectively inspired Peter Pan, and his eventual guardianship of them after the death of their parents. The tale is on the adulatory side, and it skips over the complexities of his relationship with the Llewelyn Davies family, stating incorrectly that he became the official guardian of the boys (his seizing of sole custody was never officially sanctioned). Though many cited quotations appear from Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens, Peter and Wendy, and the play Peter Pan, the narrative never explains the difference between them, and typos (the misspelling of one of Barrie's works and, at one point, the Llewelyn Davies family's name) and formatting oddities mar the text with unusual frequency. That being said, this is a solid introduction to the life and legacy of a man who has been overshadowed by his best-known work, and it may be a revelation to youngsters who thought Peter Pan was dreamed up either by Walt Disney or a peanut-butter company. Though the faces in the woodgrain-textured paintings are a little unindividuated, there's an elfin quality to them that lifts the art's earth-toned period formality. A selected list of Barrie's works and a few actresses who've played Peter appear at the book's a close; a brief list of works consulted appears on the copyright page. [End Page 105] Copyright © 2010 The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

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)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the Center for Children's Books./Bulletin of the Center for Children's BooksSame topicDigital Games and MediaFrench-language works237,207