Where has "Real" Nature Gone, Anyway? Ecocriticism, Canadian Writing and the Lures of the Virtual
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este ensayo ofrece un acercamiento a la ecocrítica en el contexto de la literatura y la cultura anglocanadiense contemporánea. Analiza las distintas definiciones de la identidad nacional en las últimas tres décadas en conexión con la naturaleza canadiense real o figurada. Después de un período de desmantelamiento de estas asociaciones, período caracterizado por el auge de un multiculturalismo fundamentalmente urbano, la aparición de la ecocrítica en los años 90 pudiera ser interpretada como una reacción conservadora para recuperar la metáfora de unidad nacional que la naturaleza proporcionaba. Pero, ¿hay algo intrínsecamente canadiense en la ecocrítica? ¿Cuál sería la contribución de escritores y críticos canadienses al campo? Para responder a estas preguntas, el ensayo escruta varios momentos en el uso de la metáfora en la producción crítica y creativa, frente a conceptos cambiantes sobre el medio natural y nuestra propia relación con él en la era de la tecnología.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".