MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383505882 · doi:10.60008/thequest.v2i1.57

Censorship and Expurgation of the Selected Children's Literature

2023· article· en· W4383505882 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe QUEST Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsCensorshipExpression (computer science)Literary criticismPsychoanalytic theoryInterpretation (philosophy)ImitationLiterary theoryExaggerationSociologyPsychologyMeaning (existential)Reading (process)EpistemologyLinguisticsPsychoanalysisSocial psychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Criticisms and reviews challenge literature to its stand accordingly to what it desires to project. People thought that all literary works is a fine expression of values, innocence and a mirror on how the society formed; literary development carries an expression easing a picture to stand out and unconsciously builds exaggeration and lack of consideration. Children, as commonly the basic target audiences of every child literature are a body that need to be considered upon publishing a certain literary piece because of stages and the type of interpretation they may develop and embrace upon reading a certain issue on the extent of literary genres who happened to unconsciously published an issue of obscenity, violence, offenses in language, and profanity in the selected children’s literature. The hard core of this study is to project critical theories of today to assess and provide solutions for literary troubles. However, to further understand the concept of censorship and expurgation, the study will be using the formalistic approach, stylistic approach, sociological approach which drives by Social Interactionist Theory which accounts to examine the fundamental role of social interaction in the development of cognition as he believed that community plays a central role in the process of making meaning. Psychoanalytic criticism as used pertains on how the language in literary pieces influenced the language development of young readers as perceived in the contact between young readers and the books as studied in the Theory of Imitation. The Speech Act Theory is an attempt of the study that examines the subfield of pragmatics concerned with the ways in which wordscan be used not only to present information but also to carry out actions and this could be assessed by the levels of action at which utterances are said to perform. The significance of this study will be based on the issues of censorship and expurgation in the works of James Barrie, Brothers Grimm, and Ruyard Kipling.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.264 · 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