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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Are literary depictions of the Manhattan Project morally obligated to disclose the use to which the Bomb was put? This chapter places a number of texts in conversation, revealing that this question is being addressed more often than it was during the Cold War years. For most of the genre’s history, Project novels have framed the atomic scientist as a hero, martyr, or an obsessive. The emergence of the atomic bomb survivor (“hibakusha”) as a contending focal point has complicated these depictions (a development which may have been aided by the fact that recent writings of acknowledged quality have come from non-American authors). This chapter goes on to examine the recurrence of the hibakusha figure as a foil, of sorts, to the atomic scientist’s sense of moral righteousness. Canadian author Dennis Bock’s novel <italic>The Ash Garden</italic> (2001) and New Zealand author James George’s novel <italic>Ocean Roads</italic> (2006) are both structured in this fashion, though it remains a troubling fact that in no work of Anglophone fiction writing does a fully developed male hibakusha figure emerge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it