MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6987471110

The Stories of Winnie-the-Pooh in Winnipeg: A Narrative Inquiry

2023· dissertation· en· W6987471110 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativePhenomenonTimelineCultural phenomenonPerspective (graphical)Presentation (obstetrics)Narrative inquiry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Winnie-the-Pooh is a world-famous children’s literature character with a unique relationship to the city of Winnipeg. Though much literature exists about Winnie-the-Pooh, the relationship between Winnie-the-Pooh and Winnipeg is much less known. The purpose of this narrative inquiry was to reveal the stories of Winnie-the-Pooh as a cultural phenomenon in Winnipeg. Braiding multiple strands of narrative research genres, historical and current connections between Winnie-the-Pooh and Winnipeg were thematically analyzed to generate these stories. A timeline presents an overview of collected and generated data in chronological order. Additionally, a visual presentation was created to display the photographic narratives of Winnie-the-Pooh as a cultural phenomenon in Winnipeg. The original stories of the world’s most beloved bear are written and portrayed from the perspective of a lifelong Winnie-the-Pooh fan who was born and raised in Winnipeg. The publication of this study is timely because of the forthcoming 100th anniversary of A. A. Milne and E. H. Shepard’s original Winnie-the-Pooh (1926), in 2026.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0180.012
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207