MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791205008 · doi:10.5539/ells.v8n1p109

Materialist Society in Albee’s Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf

2018· article· en· W2791205008 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kadhim Hatem Kaibr, Jingjing Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language and Literature Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Studies and Interdisciplinary Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterialismDreamHypocrisyEnvironmental ethicsHumanityHarmony (color)Culture of the United StatesSociologyAestheticsPsychoanalysisPsychologyPolitical scienceLawArtPhilosophyTheologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After the Second World War, The American materialistic society was one of the most themes criticized in most of Albee’s early plays. He paid a great attention to the negative impact of “American Dream” project and the negative impact of this project on the behavior of American individual. Albee explains that the “American Dream” project means the absence of the highest values and principles of humanity and this project will cause a gap between family members and between the family and society. Through Albee’s play Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? This paper will attempt to highlight on how the American individual directly affected by the materialism community which has become used to administer the American daily life, also highlight on the social hypocrisy that the high American class lived and explain how the American culture has lost the real principles to build an ideal society in which humans can live in harmony.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0250.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language and Literature StudiesSame topicCultural Studies and Interdisciplinary ResearchFrench-language works237,207