Fate and Metatheatre in The Spanish Tragedy and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When Sarah Newman enrolled in English 4204: Plays about Playing in the fall of 2014, I knew she would do excellent work. She had studied Shakespeare with me earlier, so my expectations were based on what I knew about her academic excellence. What I didn’t quite predict is the way in which Sarah would emerge as an intellectual leader in a group of very fine students indeed. Members of Plays about Playing were able to attend the Lion’s Den Theatre production of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead , and to pose a few questions for the director after the show. I remember Sarah’s joy at this event, and the alacrity with which she took the risk of asking (I believe) the first question. I didn’t know then, of course, that she would choose to write about Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead and some of its uncanny linkages with The Spanish Tragedy in her term paper, a revised version of which you are able to read here. I will not try to summarize her argument, except to say that she claims to discover that “the looming fatality present in works of metatheatre does not change over time” (5). And if you think it would be difficult to convince you to endorse this claim, all I can say is watch Sarah do it. —Dr. Ronald Huebert
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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".