MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081187372 · doi:10.1215/00982601-2875329

“The Glass of Fashion and the Mould of Form”: The Histrionic Mirror and Georgian-Era Performance

2015· article· en· W2081187372 on OpenAlexaff
Terry F. Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueEighteenth-Century Life · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorgianImitationAestheticsIdeal (ethics)DepictionArtVisual artsHistoryLiteratureEpistemologyPhilosophyPsychologyLinguisticsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay explores the impact of mirrors on Georgian-era theatrical and social performance. It suggests that looking glasses—as they burgeoned in eighteenth-century playhouses, offstage, onstage, and backstage—provided key sites for actors and audiences to engage with both the metaphysical and empirical implications of specular display. It further reveals how mirrors functioned as cultural touchstones in critical debates over the correlation between morals and manners, authenticity and facsimile, ideal imitation and original expression, and how they thus provide fresh contextual insight into an era of aesthetic transition.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEighteenth-Century LifeSame topicHistorical Art and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207