MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386641185 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v13n8p222

Mapping Massacre and Restorative Justice: A Study of Michael Ondaatje’s Anil’s Ghost

2023· article· en· W4386641185 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
D. Venisha, Yadamala Sreenivasulu

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSouth Asian Studies and Conflicts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpanish Civil WarDenialHuman rightsLawNarrativeSolidaritySociologyCrimes against humanityCommissionHumanityPolitical scienceWar crimePoliticsInternational lawArtPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research article delves into human emotions, particularly during Sri Lanka's civil war, and it is analysed through the lens of Anil’s Ghost by Michael Ondaatje. It investigates the country's tumultuous condition caused by various separatist organisations, as depicted in Anil's Ghost. The focus of the research is to analyse the series of historical events that occurred in Sri Lanka in the aftermath of colonisation. The study explores the historical intricacies of the Civil War as reflected in the novel's primary narrative. The main emphasis is on the author's factual presentation, which increasingly emphasises the values of peace and solidarity of humanity. This examination analyses Gregory H. Stanton's final stage of genocide denial. It investigates the government's practice of concealing the corpses of deceased people's remains during armed conflict. The concept of mapping is brought with regard to the Massacre during war. The overarching goal of this research is to uncover the shortcomings of the Human Rights Commission within a nation embroiled in conflict. This endeavour brings attention to the inherent dangers faced by members of human rights organisations during the tumultuous period of Sri Lanka's civil war.

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)0.006
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0270.021
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicSouth Asian Studies and ConflictsFrench-language works237,207