MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2469855136 · doi:10.1017/s0266464x16000208

Behind the Scenes: Theatre Women Write to Literary Men

2016· article· en· W2469855136 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natalia Yakubova

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Theatre Quarterly · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEastern European Communism and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarie curieArtState (computer science)Literary criticismHierarchyArt historyTransition (genetics)LiteratureHistoryPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article Natalia Yakubova explores the interactions between theatre and literature as between an actress on one side and a man of letters on the other. The interactions discussed here came at a particular historical moment, when the transition from an actor-centred to a director-centred hierarchy was taking place, and the article deals with the letters written by actresses to the men who were playwrights and/or theoreticians of the new theatre: Eleonora Duse writing to Gabriele D’Annunzio, Vera Komissarzhevskaya to Valery Bryusov, Irena Solska to Jerzy Żuławski, and Gertrud Eysoldt to Hugo von Hofmannsthal. In each case study, attention is paid to the characteristics of the relationships between a given actress and a particular writer, their attitudes towards theatre reform, the way in which the actresses evaluated the literary status of their letter writing, and, significantly, the stylistic features of their writing. Natalia Yakubova is a senior researcher of the State Institute of Art Studies in Moscow, and was Marie Curie Fellow at the Institute of Literary Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences between 2013 and 2015. She is author of O Witkacym (2010) and Teatr epokhi peremen v Polshe, Vengrii i Rossii 1990-ye–2010-ye (2014), and has published numerous articles in Russia, Poland, the USA, and Canada, among other countries.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.247 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Theatre QuarterlySame topicEastern European Communism and ReformsFrench-language works237,207