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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper speculates about what modern reception theory, focusing as it does on assumed cultural norms, can and cannot offer the student of medieval drama. It can, for example, throw into relief the fundamental question of what we can know about medieval reception, so that we avoid foregrounding the evident literary simplicity of some of these texts at the expense of acknowledging their cultural complexities. The student of medieval theatre does well to proceed with caution in speculating on or theorizing the relationship between medieval plays and their audiences. The relationship between speech and action deserves at least to be problematized. Beyond that lies the wider challenge of reconstructing the differences between medieval and the modern audience assumptions about the cultural event in which they are participating and its relationship to the world they inhabit. The paper suggests, drawing examples from the York Cycle, that a modern audience member cannot avoid imposing upon the plays contemporary ways of seeing, particularly when it comes to scenic arrangement; the paper, therefore, avoids closure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it