MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161731191 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511920820.005

The comic chorus

2011· book-chapter· en· W2161731191 on OpenAlexaff
Alan Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Musicological Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChorusComicsArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the onset of one of those outbreaks of antiquarian enthusiasm with which western culture is periodically stricken, a friend confided to Thomas Gray his ambition to write a tragedy with a chorus. The poet's response was not encouraging: A greater liberty in the choice of the fable, and the conduct of it, was the necessary consequence of retrenching the Chorus…The soft effusions of the soul, Mr. Mason, will not bear the presence of a gaping, singing, dancing, moralizing, uninteresting crowd. And not love alone, but every passion is checked and cooled by this fiddling crew…Could Hamlet have met the Ghost, or taken his mother to task in their company? If Othello had said a harsh word to his wife before them , would they not have danced to the window and called the watch? Gray objected to the chorus because he found it unbelievable and, hence, preposterous. Ironically, realism is a significant legacy of Greek art. The development of sculpture from archaic kouroi to Praxitelean naturalism was a manifestation of the same aspiration to realism that led to the separation of the chorus from dramatic action in New Comedy. Western culture absorbed Greco-Roman realism with the Renaissance, applying it relentlessly to drama of all kinds, only countenancing a chorus within the surreal conventions of opera and ballet.

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)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.009

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.077 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicDiverse Musicological StudiesFrench-language works237,207