MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7041076356

Refracted

2021· article· en· W7041076356 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePortuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Formations and Processes Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFreudian slipAmbivalenceGazeAliasFreudian theory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From 1843 to 1872, Grace Marks (Sarah Gadon) served time, at the Kingston Penitentiary, for murdering her employer Thomas Kinnear (Paul Gross), and his housekeeper/lover, Nancy Montgomery (Anna Paquin). In 1859, a young American psychiatric doctor, Dr. Simon Jordan (Edward Holcroft), travels to Kingston, under the request of a clemency committee, to study Grace, helping her restore her lost memory of the crimes, with the purpose of writing a favourable report which would concede Grace‟s pardon. This article undertakes the examination of the television miniseries Alias Grace, based on the 1996 homonymous novel by Canadian author Margaret Atwood, by focusing on the analyses of the overall series through a Freudian perspective. It will be argued that each episode is imbued of symbolism that normally escapes the understanding of the viewer. Therefore, I shall illustrate certain aspects connected with Freudian symbolism, according to film studies language, while establishing other important connections to prove the profuse presence of the male gaze and how Grace Marks, an ambivalent protagonist with a fluid personality, navigates this stereotyped 19th society dominated by patriarchal values and invested in the annihilation of the female subject.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1170.052

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePortuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT)Same topicGeological Formations and Processes ExplorationFrench-language works237,207