MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

HOW TO RECOGNIZE A HERO IN EURIPIDES' ELECTRA

2015· article· en· W1839084410 on OpenAlex
Victoria Wohl

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

VenueBulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHEROTragedy (event)ElitePremiseLiteratureArtPoliticsAction (physics)DemocracyAestheticsPhilosophyLawPolitical scienceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Why were the heroes of Greek tragedy all elite? Why in the premier genre of democratic Athens should the action always be performed by noblemen and not by, say, a poor farmer? Euripides' Electra raises this question and dramatizes its stakes. It poses the possibility of a non-elite hero – in fact, a farmer – only to show how and why this radical premise fails to pan out. The famous recognition scene compels the audience to recognize Orestes as the play's hero based on literary allusions and theatrical conventions, and in the process to disavow the egalitarian reality the play itself has staged. Electra does not ultimately answer the question why the tragic protagonist has to be elite, but it does reveal the consequences, political and dramatic, of accepting that necessity. In so doing, it exposes both the utopian potential of tragedy and its limits, and challenges us in the audience to acknowledge our role in both.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.202 · 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