MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3049267282 · doi:10.1353/nin.2018.0009

Long-Distance Love Affair, or How to Root for a Team That's Three Thousand Miles Away

2018· article· en· W3049267282 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paul Hensler

Notice bibliographique

RevueNine · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueAmerican Sports and Literature
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLeagueClubHistoryArt historyArtMedia studiesSociology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Long-Distance Love Affair, or How to Root for a Team That's Three Thousand Miles Away Paul Hensler (bio) As a lifelong Connectican whose first baseball idol was Mickey Mantle, I was possessed of a fandom that wandered from the New York Yankees in early 1967, to Boston later that year when the Red Sox survived a four-team scramble to win the American League pennant—and almost capture the World Series—and then back to New York in 1969 when the Mets stunned the Baltimore Orioles in the fall classic. With three major league franchises in such close proximity to my hometown, there is a natural inclination for others to assume that one of them is my team of choice. However, when a baseball conversation prompts the question of which club I root for—a group currently titled the Los Angeles Angels—that answer elicits a follow-up query. "Oh, you're from California?" My reply can only be sufficient by way of what follows. After divulging that I've lived in Connecticut my entire life, I explain a number of factors that entered into my confounding selection that occurred in 1970, give or take a year. In the late 1960s, the California Angels—and we'll revisit that name in a bit—were a mediocre team, but their shortstop, Jim Fregosi, was one of the better players at his position, and his keystone partner, Bobby Knoop, wasn't too shabby either. The supporting cast, however, was only fair to middling, so the Angels were destined to be a .500 team. Yet they displayed one sartorial dash that was unique: an actual halo of white that was stitched into the caps they wore. The navy panels of the hats were augmented by a bright red bill, and the white interlocking "CA" at the front made this headgear pretty classy looking, so classy, in fact, that I commandeered a copy of The Sporting News, and got Mom write a check to accompany the coupon [End Page 99] to be sent to a sporting goods dealer—in Chicago, if memory serves—for an Angels cap. After the passage of requisite time, a shoebox-sized carton arrived in the mail, and my excitement was at a level akin to Christmas morning. I couldn't wait to open the package and proudly outfit my pate with my halo-crested cap. Imagine my reaction when I uncrated the contents and discovered that the much-awaited item, while remaining faithful to the color scheme, featured two crushing revisions. Missing was the "CA," its space now occupied by an elongated lower-case "a," but worst of all was the absence of the cherished halo once adorning the top. Well, the halo wasn't completely gone, but it had become miniaturized and placed at a jaunty angle as if to be hanging from the top left of the new "a." Crestfallen but still loyal, I soon after broke out a little bottle of white Testor's model paint and did my own retro-update of the original halo around the top, the new reality and authenticity be damned. With the cap now conforming to my stilted standard, it was time to embark on the business of root, root, rooting for my home team, though located on the other side of the country. In an era predating the arrival of the internet, this posed a serious challenge to finding out the scores of many games, especially those played at night in Anaheim. Our most important local newspaper printed morning and afternoon editions, but you could always count on the composite posting of results to look like this, from May 14, 1976: Boston 2, Milwaukee 1 Baltimore 6, New York 2 Cleveland 6, Detroit 3 Kansas City 7, Chicago 1 Minnesota at California, late Texas at Oakland, late If the game—any game, for that matter—wasn't completed by 11:00 p.m., press time for the morning paper, that result would receive the "late" designation, and if you could hold out for the afternoon newspaper, at least you had the opportunity to catch up on the score. But unless the Yankees or Red Sox were involved...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,448
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,980

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0210,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,242
Écart entre enseignants0,219 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNineMême sujetAmerican Sports and LiteratureTravaux en français237 207