MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800293008 · doi:10.1080/00085006.2018.1445417

Friedrich Nietzsche, Dmitrii Merezhkovskii, and the Russian Renaissance

2018· article· en· W2800293008 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Hegel
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe RenaissancePhilosophyArtArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The artistic, poetic, and literary movement in the years between 1890 and 1917 has long been known as the “Silver Age,” a name that does not convey the movement’s essence and one that was mostly used retrospectively. The artists, philosophers, and writers of the day gave their own name to this cultural flourishing, the “Russian Renaissance,” because they believed they were embarking on a rebirth of literature, culture, art, and religion similar to that of the European Renaissance. In their search for a new aesthetic vision, the Russian Renaissance turned to the classical world, especially ancient Greece. But their view of that culture was distinctly shaped by works of the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. This article will highlight the particular, crucial role of Dmitrii Merezhkovskii in bringing a Nietzschean view of Greece into the Russian Renaissance. Merezhkovskii’s Nietzschean celebration of the classical world, and his belief that this world could reinvigorate Christianity and Russian culture, proved greatly influential for the artists, poets, and philosophers that followed him.

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, Insufficient 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 score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.196 · 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