Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is focused on the sufferings brought about to the two tramps by their aimless waiting for Godot, an unknown person who promises to come but fails to show up again and again. By the analysis of such elements as physical and mental pain, meaninglessness of waiting, the flow of time, human relations, life and death that the two tramps experience in their waiting that reflect human pain in the paper, the author tries to reveal the fact that existence seems to be something imposed upon us by an unknown force and we suffer as a result of it as there seems no apparent meaning. Thus, the conclusion is reached that, man’s tragedy comes from a double source—an internal one arising from his finite nature and an external one in which that nature collides with the world. Key Words: human condition human suffering tragic fate meaninglessness Resume: L’article present se concentre sur les souffrances de deux clochards entrainees par leur attente sans but de Godot, un inconnu qui, promettant de venir, n’apparait pas toujours. A travers l’analyse des elements, tels que les douleurs physique et mentale, l’attente insignifiante, l’ecoulement du temps, les relations humaines, la vie et la mort que les deux chochards connaissent durant leur attente, qui refletent les souffrances humaines, l’auteur tente de reveler le fait que l’existence semble quelque chose imposee par une force inconnue et que nous en souffrons dans la mesure ou il n’y a aucun sens apparent. Ainsi, on tire la conclusion : la tragedie de l’homme provient de deux sources – l’une, interne, nait de sa nature limitee et l’autre, externe, emane de la collision entre sa nature et le monde. Mots-Cles: conditions humaines, souffrances humaines, destin tragique, insignifiance
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".