MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2492320398 · doi:10.4000/tvseries.1445

Crossing the Pond: Adapting The Office to an American Audience

2012· article· en· W2492320398 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTV/Series · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism
Canadian institutionsQuebec Rehabilitation Research Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Post officeAsk priceMedia studiesHistoryPolitical scienceSociologyPublic relationsBusinessPsychologyPublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The success of the BBC’s The Office is undeniable: it is available in hundreds of countries and has been called the best sitcom in recent history, and singlehandedly launched the careers of Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant, its creators. Interestingly enough, though the vast majority of its fame is entirely due to the original series, it has also been adapted. One of the first and undoubtedly the most successful of these adaptations is the American version of The Office on NBC, now beginning its eighth season as the network’s flagship series. The question one must ask, however, is why this adaptation was necessary at all: given that the series was already in English, and that its references were for the most part international (or even American), why did the American network feel the need to “translate”? Through a close analysis of the respective pilot episodes, I hope to better understand the impetus behind this choice.

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.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.222 · 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