MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7037919370

Estudio sobre género, sexualidad y formación de la identidad en obras relacionadas con Peter Pan

2015· dissertation· en· W7037919370 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRUC (Universidade Da Coruña) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101HyporeflexiaArticular cartilage damageFusible alloyDemotionDysgeusia
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[Abstract]This study focuses on works that revolve around Peter Pan, which include: James Barrie’s novel Peter and Wendy (1904), Walt Disney’s Peter Pan (1953) and Return to Neverland (2002), and Damion Dietz’s Neverland (2003).The central aim is to analyze these works both individually and comparatively to show how complex the development of gender roles, sexuality and identity is during adolescence. Moreover, I will examine the consequences that a poor nurturing environment and an inadequate growth of such aspects could have for a series of characters, who may even be led to what seems a fatal loss of identity. The theoretical framework adopted goes from Freud and Piaget’s psychological research on children, to Wasko’s sociological analysis of Walt Disney and other critics in the fields of LGBT and Queer Studies (e.g. Butler). The conclusions I have reached provide an interpretation the general public may not be familiar with, which include: reflections on Peter Pan’s demonic nature, Neverland’s horrors, the complexity of children’s literature and how the media manipulates our perception of female characters.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.224 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRUC (Universidade Da Coruña)Same topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207