Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Gift of Stone consists of a novel and a critical commentary written in response to a key event in Irish history, the Great Irish Famine. The novel for this practice-based PhD in Creative Writing imagines two lives – that of a young Irishwoman and her family caught up in the Famine in the 1840s and a contemporary Canadian woman who returns to Ireland in search of her roots over 150 years later. The commentary explores my methods of research and writing and the issues that arise when writing historical fiction. As creative transdisciplinary approaches are central to my work, I include visual art and site-specific research as part of my research, and I will discuss this below. The commentary discusses what I needed to do in order to write; reading, researching, walking, being open to environment and art, soaking in atmosphere; in other words, all the things that were not writing but were nevertheless a necessary part of the writing process. The commentary reflects the manner in which the process unfolded. The first section briefly examines igniting ideas and inspiration which includes visual art, historical and fictional texts, and site-specific research. The second section consists of original research carried out while I was a writer in residence at Uillinn Arts Centre, Skibbereen during the Coming Home: Art and the Great Hunger exhibition in the summer of 2018. The third section explores my writing process, the narrative wrong turns I took and technical difficulties I encountered with particular regard to voice and tense. For the purpose of this thesis and word limits imposed, I have divided the novel into two sections. Part one is in the body of the thesis and includes my contemporary Canadian character, Rosie, as well as Famine era, Ellen. Part two is in the Appendix and completes the novel.
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.008 |
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".