MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Tragic Sources of Character,Mary in Long Day’s Journey Into Night

2010· article· en· W1814993615 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
A-lin Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Studies and Interdisciplinary Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTragedy (event)Character (mathematics)HumanitiesDestiny (ISS module)ArtMisfortuneViewpointsPerformance artArt historyLiteratureNarrative

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The realistic tragedy ---Long Day’s Journey Into Night marks the climax of Eugene O’Neill’s literary career. This paper explores the tragic sources of Mary’s misfortune from multiple dimensions: current social factors, the internal vulnerability of human nature, the mutual indifference and hurt among family members, O’Neill’s early personal experiences and the dramatist’s viewpoints on tragic destiny. Keywords: Long Day’s Journey Into Night, Mary, tragedy, source Resume La tragedie realistique - Long Day’s Journey Into Night marque l’apogee de la carriere litteraire d’ Eugene O’Neill. Cette these presente essaie de faire une recherche sur les sources approfondies de la tragedie des personnages importants – Marie selon les 5 points d’attitude: les facteurs objectifs sociaux, les faiblesses humaines subjectives, l’indifference et la blessure de la part des membres de famille, les influences de l’experience de vie des premieres annees d’Eugene O’Neill ainsi que son destion tragique. Mots-cles : Long Day’s Journey Into Night, Marie, tragedie, source 摘 要 現實主義悲劇《進入黑夜的漫長旅程》是尤金 •奧尼爾劇作生涯的頂峰。本文試圖多維度探究劇中重要角色-瑪麗悲劇人生的複雜根源:社會因素,人性弱點,家庭成員的隔閡與傷害,奧尼爾早年不幸生活經歷的影響和他的悲劇命運觀。 關鍵詞:《進入黑夜的漫長旅程》,瑪麗,悲劇,根源

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicCultural Studies and Interdisciplinary ResearchFrench-language works237,207