Bibliographic record
Abstract
This piece of creative writing is a single piece from a larger collection of poems that explores different sides of love, with a special focus on longing and waiting, but also tackling darker aspects, such as abuse and rape. Using a mythical background and such figures as Persephone, Eurydice, Orpheus, Psyche and Artemis, the collection aims to convey softness and calm, while also representing empowered feminine voices. The poem is composed of varying stanza forms and rhythms mixed with prose and using motifs and colours that also occur in other poems of the collection to create echoes within the piece. It is also part of a wider artistic project that includes paintings, photographs, a short film and other creations, which all work as so many reverberations and refractions of the poems themselves.The project was partly inspired by H.D.’s poem “Eurydice,” a piece that really made me want to work with myth and to give a voice to women whose perspective is rarely portrayed in literature. At the time, I was also working on my doctoral thesis, especially on contact and touch, and on representations of love in poetry. As I kept working on poetic voice and poetic representations of sensations and breathing, I realised that through writing more poetry, I could also get a different hold of the creative process that still nourishes my thoughts on the relationships between poetry, sensation, empathy and healing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.446 | 0.192 |
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".