MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040743675 · doi:10.1080/09555801003679074

Rampo's repetitions: the doppelganger in Edogawa Rampo and Tsukamoto Shin'ya

2010· article· en· W2040743675 on OpenAlexafffund
Baryon Tensor Posadas

Bibliographic record

VenueJapan Forum · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJapanese History and Culture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of TorontoHokkaido UniversityUniversity of California, Santa Cruz
KeywordsConfession (law)Repetition (rhetorical device)NarrativeLiteratureConfessionalPsychoanalysisUncannyPhilosophyArtSociologyHistoryPsychologyLinguisticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychoanalytical discourse has been instrumental in forming the figure of the doppelganger as a coherent concept and genre of film and fiction, typically linking it with notions of ‘the uncanny’ and ‘repetition compulsion’. In this paper, I explore the functions of the figure of the doppelganger in a text that repeats across (and in effect foregrounds the relations between) two separate historical moments: Edogawa Rampo's short story ‘The twins’ and Tsukamoto Shin'ya's subsequent adaptation of this story titled Gemini (Edogawa 1969 Edogawa, Rampo. 1969. “‘Sōseiji: aru shikeishū ga kyōkaishi ni uchiaketa hanashi’ (The twins: a death row convict's confession to a priest)”. In Edogawa Rampo zenshū 1: yaneura no sampōsha (The complete works of Edogawa Rampo: the stalker in the attic), Kōdansha. [Google Scholar]; Tsukamoto 1999 Tsukamoto, Shin'ya. 1999. Sōseiji – GEMINI, Japan: Kaijyu Theater. [Google Scholar]). In these texts, the doppelganger appears in relation to other motifs such as feigned amnesia and concealment of memory, the deployment of confessional narrative strategies, as well as the problem of adaptation, in effect addressing the stakes of questions of repetition. Moreover, when situated against the constellation of discourses (e.g. psychoanalysis, urbanization, visuality) that are constitutive of its formation as a concept and genre, the doppelganger also serves as a productive point of departure from which to articulate the stakes of the critical practices through which objects of investigation are produced.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.010
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJapan ForumSame topicJapanese History and CultureFrench-language works237,207