MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380627805 · doi:10.55529/jlls.33.39.42

Study of Margaret Atwood’s Writing Study in Effect on Feminist

2023· article· en· W4380627805 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Muntadhar Jabbar Abbas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Language and Linguistics in Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative Fiction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPortraitFeminismTheme (computing)HumanityGender studiesCouragePatriotismLiteratureNew WomanIdentity (music)HumilityFemininityMulticulturalismPersonaSociologyHistoryArtAestheticsArt historyPolitical scienceLawHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through Margaret Atwood's works, the research explores the woman's struggle for survival as it defines her role as a woman in modern society. Her books deal with the theme of survival as shown by the female characters. Her books' major themes include failure and fertility, multiculturalism, nature vs humanity, the search for one's own identity, Southern Ontario Gothic, unlikely legends, urban versus rural, and women's empowerment. She has tried to include all of her experiences as a woman, a female, and an essayist because she is recognized as a women's movement author of the 1960s. Patriotism has a strong hold upon Atwood. Her sense of feminism, patriotism and both the Canadian and female characters is also connected to her feminism. Her fundamental compositions reveal her awareness of gender and struggle for existence. Her characters and their personalities are subtly revealed in her stories, which transport the reader to a previous memory through which the present is seen and experienced. Atwood controls women's comfortable and realistic interactions in her books, and she creates a self-portrait of women as artisans and legends who are reliable to their own internal paths. She paints a portrait of a legendary figure whose persona doesn't require depth or tenderness. The protagonists and the novels have a remarkable relationship that allows for the recording of their emotions and dreams.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0300.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Language and Linguistics in SocietySame topicUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative FictionFrench-language works237,207