MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082515961 · doi:10.1080/00210860601005088

Kiarostami and the Aesthetics of Modern Persian Poetry

2006· article· en· W2082515961 on OpenAlexaff
Khatereh Sheibani

Bibliographic record

VenueIranian Studies · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCinema and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryArtificialityFilmmakingHumanismLiteratureAmateurArtMovie theaterReflexivityAestheticsPhilosophyHistorySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abbas Kiarostami's filmmaking draws on the aesthetics of modern Persian poetry, especially the poetry of Forough Farrokhzad and Sohrab Sepehri. In his films, Kiarostami, impacted by Sepehri and Farrokhzad's “de-politicized” poetry, “de-experiences” our perception of reality. Kiarostami aestheticizes everyday life by employing non-manipulative film stylistics. In films such as Through the Olive Trees and Where Is the Friend's House? he uses a minimalist approach by employing amateur actors and children, depth of field, and minimal camera work to enhance Sepehri's philosophy of novel outlook. Through a masterful intermingling of poetic discourse with his film sensibilities, Kiarostami has achieved a profoundly humanist approach to cinema. Kiarostami mixes the two genres of documentary and fiction to remind the audience of the artificiality of constructing a factual point. To attain this goal, he sometimes uses an ironical and witty cinematic language that is harshly self-critical and self-reflexive. Kiarostami is a poet/philosopher who “writes” his poetic films with camera.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIranian StudiesSame topicCinema and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207