Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modem drama, the question raised by the conveners of the Modern:Drama (defining the field) conference and the current editors of Modern Drama, has a past that is selectively remembered and denied in the institutions that support our scholarship. It is nearly absent from current scholarship investigating the times, spaces, and practices of Western modernity and modernism. It is also absent from the academic memories of those who, like me, found themselves happily ensconced in high school literature classes that, even through the 1960s, were dominated by the methods and ideology of the New Critics." Focusing on the autotelic object, most often the short poem, to the exclusion of authorial biography, tradition, and historical context, New Criticism sought to create a preserve of literary language in imitation of T.S. Eliot's modernist imperative to purify the language of the tribe. In its heyday in the 1940s and 1950s, New Criticism exhorted us to never "go outside the poem" lest we merely use literature to defend a depleted liberal humanism or, far worse, to illustrate a Marxist analysis of social forces.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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".