MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391374210 · doi:10.26812/pajls.v9i.1705

Stumbling past the threshold of languages: Natsume Kinnosuke's contiguous space of language, literature, and theory

2009· article· en· W4391374210 on OpenAlexaff
Atsuko Sakaki

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Association for Japanese Literary Studies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJapanese History and Culture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace (punctuation)LinguisticsHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I had buried all the books of literature in the depths of my suitcase.That was because I was convinced that tl)'ing to understand what literature is by reading literature is like tiJ'ing to clean blood with blood.I vowed to myself that I would get to the bottom of how literature-in psychological terms-needs to be born in this world, to develop, and to degenerate; I vowed that I would get to the bottom of how literature-in social terms-exists, prospers, and declines.Natsume S6seki 1By the author's own admission, Bungakuron (Theory of Literature, 1907) is meant to theorize literature with the introduction of non-literary theories.One of the few Japanese canonical authors who taught foreign literature at a university in Japan, 2 Natsume Kinnosuke ( 1867 -1916) 3 had reasons to be theoretical.As a teacher of English at what is now the University of Tokyo, he did not exude the perceived natural physical authenticity that his predecessor, Lafcadio Hearn (1850-1904), was said to bring to the teaching ofEnglish. 4 Neither was he inclined to show off the privilege of having studied English in England, as other "returnees from the West" (yoko gaeri) might have, being skeptical about the command of 1 Natsume Soseki, Bungakuron, vol. 9 of Soseki zenshii (Tokyo: Iwanami

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Association for Japanese Literary StudiesSame topicJapanese History and CultureFrench-language works237,207