MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809296286 · doi:10.32396/usurj.v4i2.355

The Positive Side of Imposture in Twelfth Night

2018· article· en· W2809296286 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Devyn Manderscheid, Alex Diakow, Shania Wallin

Bibliographic record

VenueUSURJ University of Saskatchewan Undergraduate Research Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDeception detection and forensic psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComedyCharacter (mathematics)LyingReading (process)LiteratureHeuristicAestheticsPsychologyArtPhilosophyEpistemologyLinguisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are taught from childhood that lies have negative consequences, but Shakespeare has them often result in happy endings. We want to know why, in Shakespearean comedy, lying can be good. In reading Twelfth Night, we wanted to understand why leading characters tell lies, and why those lies so often end favourably. What is Shakespeare really saying by having lies not necessarily be a bad thing? To achieve our goal, we employed primary textual analysis, a review of published critical analyses, and heuristic reasoning. We continue to be interested in what motivates a leading character in a comedy to want to lie, and what are the consequences for her doing so.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.018
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUSURJ University of Saskatchewan Undergraduate Research JournalSame topicDeception detection and forensic psychologyFrench-language works237,207