MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606602709 · doi:10.26522/br.v13i1.831

"The Gad; or, Prolegomena to a double bill"

2017· article· en· W2606602709 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Zdravko Planinc

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Brock Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEthics, Aesthetics, and Art
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConformistRelation (database)PoliticsRelevance (law)WifeHistorySociologyArt historyLiteratureMedia studiesEpistemologyArtPhilosophyLawPolitical scienceTheologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work of creative non-fiction, a search for copies of The Conformist (1970) and I Went Down (1997) in the video stores of downtown Toronto becomes the occasion for a philosophical discussion of the relevance of Plato’s Republic for understanding the relation of erotics and politics in the modern world when the author has a chance encounter with an old acquaintance who teaches political theory at the University of Toronto. The evening’s events are recounted in a semi-autobiographical email to his distant wife the next day.
 - The Editor

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Brock ReviewSame topicEthics, Aesthetics, and ArtFrench-language works237,207