MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Inherit and Breakthrough of Death of a Salesman to the Traditional Tragedy

2010· article· en· W1849785167 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ying Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTragedy (event)Theme (computing)HumanitiesSubject (documents)PhilosophyArtLiteratureComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tragedy Death of a Salesman is a breakthrough to the traditional tragedy on subject, protagonist and dramatic language, however, it inherits some traditions of the classical tragedy on theme, dramatic structure and symbolism. This paper, according to a comparison on the above aspects, discusses the reasons for the success of Death of a Salesman. Key words: Death of a Salesman, traditional tragedy, inherit, breakthrough Resume La tragedie Mort d’un commis-voyageur constitue un developpement de la tragedie traditonnelle dans les domaines du sujet, du heros et du langage dramatique, cependant, elle herite de quelques traditions de la tratedie traditonnelle tels que le theme, la structure dramatique et la facon d’expression symboliste. Cet article traite, par la comparaison sur les aspects ci-dessus, les raisons du succes de Mort d’un commis-voyageur Mots cles : Mort d’un commis-voyageur, la tragedie traditionnelle, l’heritage, le developpement 摘 要 《推銷員之死》與傳統悲劇在題材、主人公、和語言方面截然不同,是對傳統悲劇的突破,然而其在主題、戲劇結構、象徵主義的表現手法等方面又繼承了古典悲劇的傳統。通過對《推銷員之死》與傳統悲劇在上述幾方面的比較,可探討其成功的原因。 關鍵詞: 《推銷員之死》;傳統悲劇;繼承;突破

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.012
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.305
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 topicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207