A Man, a Family, and a Story: Influences on the Creation of J. M. Barrie's "Peter Pan"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
All that is needed to reach Neverland is a little faith, trust, and pixie dust; at least, this is what children are told when they first hear the story of Peter Pan. However, understanding the story of Peter Pan, which wrestles with topics of love, fear, and growing up, is more complex than merely flying toward the second star to the right and straight on till morning. The early life of James M. Barrie was filled with a deep desire to gain affection after his family faced a great tragedy when he was a child, and this longing is seen throughout his stories. However, his life and writing were changed forever once Barrie met the Llewelyn Davies family, which led to the creation of the boy, Peter Pan. When crafting the character of Peter Pan, Barrie incorporated much of his distraught childhood, his interactions with the Llewelyn Davies family, and his realization of the inevitability of growing up to create the tales of an immortalized boy who never had to grow up.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".