Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rosmersholm has a readily perceptible line of action that takes Rosmer and Rebecca step by step toward going ‘‘the same way that Beata went’’ (398/547, 436/582),1 although we may not be sure how some of these individual steps work precisely. Early on, Rosmer still cannot walk on the bridge from which his wife Beata threw herself into the mill-race, and he is not eager to tell Kroll about his changed views on social, political, and religious matters, but he insists that he is entirely at ease concerning Beata’s death and Kroll’s hostile reaction. His tranquillity is shattered during Act Two by the new information about Beata that Kroll and Mortensgard provide and by Rebecca’s shocking response to his proposal of marriage. Rosmer, as he emphatically insists to Rebecca, is now overcome with guilt and convinced that he will never be able to fulfil his dream of creating an ideal social and political order in the land by ennobling all those capable of intellectual and spiritual growth. Kroll’s probing of Rebecca’s age and origins in Act Three shatters her sense of well-being as well. This apparently makes her more responsive to Rosmer’s suffering, for she promises to restore him to his happy state of innocence and then confesses that he should feel no guilt for Beata’s suicide because it was she who caused it by luring Beata into it. Rather than having its intended effect, Rebecca’s confession destroys Rosmer’s dream and puts both him and her in deep despair. In an attempt to free himself from despair, Rosmer demands proof from Rebecca of her love for him and faith in him and of his having fulfilled his dream at least to the extent of ennobling her. This proof is her going to her death in the mill-race, and when she agrees to do it, he decides to join her. But what are we to make of this line of action? How are we to get to the bottom of it?
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".