Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tinker Bell was first introduced to audiences through J. M. Barrie's Peter Pan play (1904) and Peter and Wendy novel (1911). Throughout the theatrical productions, Tinker Bell did not assume a physical form, instead she appeared as a flash of small light zig-zagging around the actors on stage. This visualisation embodied Barrie's text, where Mrs Darling describes Tinker Bell as a "ball of light... like a flame had escaped from the fire, not as big as your hand, but [she] darted about the room like a living thing (cited in Meyers et al. 2014: 102). While the plays delighted audiences (including Walt Disney in 1913), Tinker Bell did not achieve fame in her own right until she was "humanised by Walt Disney in the 1950s when the Disney film Peter Pan was released on 3 February 1953 and "was an immediate commercial and critical success (Barros 2007: 1). Originally a Disney Princess (although no more), Tinker Bell has been referred to as one of Disney's "mascots (McClintock 2014: para. 9). This chapter explores the trajectory of Tinker Bell from a character in a play to being the unofficial mascot of one of the largest corporations in the world.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".