MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1558388835 · doi:10.4000/lisa.1131

The Rape of Lucretia, premier « opéra anglais » de Britten ? 

2008· article· fr· W1558388835 on OpenAlex
Gilles Couderc

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue LISA / LISA e-journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Policy, and Dickens Studies
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperaOratorioArtContext (archaeology)MusicalLiteratureHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Rape of Lucretia is Britten’s second opera, composed in the wake of the popular success of Peter Grimes and amidst the composer’s difficulties in sustaining his ambitious project to restore English opera and to set up his own opera company despite the dire post-war economic context. As Britten’s first chamber opera and the only one that retells a story from Roman Antiquity it stands apart in the Britten canon. But the collaboration of designer John Piper for the scenery and of Ronald Duncan for the libretto, the resort to dramatic verse, the borrowings from Blake, Donne and Shakespeare, as well as the musical references to English oratorio and Purcell and to Britten’s own personal questioning contribute to making it Britten’s first “English opera”.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.556
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.256 · 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