Imagination in Canadian Fantasy Picturebooks: Beyond the Boundaries between Fantasy and Reality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores how to read picturebooks with some of the representative Canadian fantasy picturebooks: Munch’s The Paper Bag Princess, Morgan’s Matthew and the Midnight Ball Game, Bourgeois’s Franklin in the Dark, and Wynne-Jones’s Zoom at Sea. Reading picturebooks need to focus on words and images at the same time. Sometimes images tell more stories than words written in the pages. Children know how to read and what to read through pictures by intuition, while adults lost the ability to read pictures, only focusing on words with traditional way of reading. The function of pictures in picturebooks is to describe and represent. The function of words is to narrative. So the relationship between pictures and words are important and also complex. Picturebooks are an effective and interesting way of telling stories. They give pleasure to viewers and readers, both children and adults. In the Canadian fantasy picturebooks above, readers enjoy the story with the written words and more stories (that the words don’t tell) through focusing and reading pictures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".