Bibliographic record
Abstract
Boldt, Mike. Colors versus Shapes. New York: Harper Collins, 2014. Print.Mike Boldt, a local Alberta author/illustrator, creates a carefully scripted theatrical scene in which colours and shapes vie to be the main character or star in a new book hosted by the characters from his first book, 123 versus ABC. The interplay between the colours and shapes is witty, entertaining and educational. Mike Boldt presents the dialogue in colored speech balloons, which allows for a great read aloud experience for the young audience which it is intended. A further benefit of this fun picture book is the introduction and explanation of the mixing of colours and the difference of shapes. This feature makes this book an excellent tool for young students to learn how primary colors combine to make secondary and tertiary colors. Additionally, it enables students to discover the names of different 2D shapes as the shapes morph through the addition of sides. Bantering and competition heat things up until both groups learn that working together is much more productive than working apart. Children will enjoy exploring the final product of such creative collaboration.In all, Colors versus Shapes is a fun educational picture book, full of colourfully illustrated pages with the theme of friendship as a the final lesson to be learned. Highly recommended: 4 out of 4 stars.Reviewer: Kelly Maxwell
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.044 | 0.029 |
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".