MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405887479 · doi:10.2478/rjes-2024-0008

A Postmodernist Rewriting Of Homer’s Penelope: Margaret Atwood’s <i>The Penelopiad</i>

2024· article· en· W4405887479 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raluca-Andreea Petruş

Bibliographic record

VenueRomanian Journal of English Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative Fiction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeReinterpretationCharacter (mathematics)LiteratureSilenceRepresentation (politics)WifeFeelingArtHistoryPhilosophyAestheticsTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The article analyses Margaret Atwood’s reinterpretation of the Ithacan queen, Penelope, the wife of Odysseus, taking into consideration the silence-voice interplay between the original female character and her postmodernist re-representation, Penelope 2.0, the protagonist of The Penelopiad . In the Canadian writer’s novel, Penelope’s voice gets empowered through narrative means. Her voice reaches its peak or highest degree of expression in Atwood’s The Penelopiad , namely due to its main character and narrator, Penelope 2.0. Considering that a female first-person narrator elaborates the novel’s narrative, the article demonstrates how Penelope 2.0 expresses her feelings and thoughts regarding a series of events which occurred in the original text of The Odyssey, events which she elucidates by offering direct, well-developed insight, without any constraints.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.013
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRomanian Journal of English StudiesSame topicUtopian, Dystopian, and Speculative FictionFrench-language works237,207