Bibliographic record
Abstract
T he bird depicted in Carel Fabritius's The Goldfinch (1654), the painting repro- duced on the cover of this book, is a European goldfinch.It is not a bird likely to be encountered in Canada.Because this book interrogates a particular kind of attention to specific bird species in the context of Canadian poetry, some explanation for the choice of this image is in order.As soon as I saw the painting, I knew I wanted it for the cover.Its Europeanness is in keeping both with my discussion of British Romantic poets (and McKay's own response to that tradition; McKay doesn't limit his avian subjects to Canadian species, though most of the birds he writes about are encountered in Canada) and with my concept of multiple ornithologies of desire (scientific and literary), which emerge from and connect to a kind of Enlightenment rationality not limited to Canada.Fabritius's painting demonstrates both the historical and the very immediate trajectory of a human desire to know the avian other by capturing and looking ... and painting and writing, I suppose.One of my goals with this book is to position McKay within a Canadian as well as an international (mostly European and American) tradition of eco-and avian poetry/poetics.In that sense, the Fabritius cover anticipates that broader scope.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.274 | 0.086 |
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".