MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062247372 · doi:10.3138/md.45.1.1

Reading, Writing, and Authority in Ibsen's "Women's Plays"

2002· article· en· W2062247372 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Penny Farfan

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Drama · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Studies and Interdisciplinary Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramaLiteratureReading (process)HegemonyCriticismHistoryArtPhilosophyLawLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the opening chapter of their now-classic work of feminist literary criticism The Madwoman in the Attic (1979), Sandra M. Gilbert and Susan Gubar cite Edward Said's meditation on the etymology of the word "author," "with which writer, deity, and paterfamilias are identified", in order to establish a deep linkage between writing and patriarchal authority in Western culture. This critical insight pervades Ibsen's "women's plays,"1 for though it has commonly been suggested that the door-slam at the end of A Doll House signalled the advent of both modern drama and the women's movement, Nora's forgery of her father's signature is in fact the act of transgression that sets the drama in motion; indeed, authorship and authority are linked throughout Ibsen's "women's plays," so that acts of writing, reading, or — in Hedda's case — manuscript-burning serve to signify the female protagonists' respective degrees of critical engagement with hegemonic cultural texts that deny women status as authoritative subjects.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.028
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern DramaSame topicCultural Studies and Interdisciplinary ResearchFrench-language works237,207