MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902202378 · doi:10.3968/10249

Failure of Mythology in Faustus

2017· article· en· W2902202378 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roohollah Roozbeh

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in literature and language · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMythologyHEROThe RenaissanceTragedy (event)DramaLiteratureChristianityCivilizationPhilosophyArtHistoryArt historyReligious studiesArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of mythology in renaissance is of utmost importance. The reason for mythology found in the renaissance texts was because renaissance figures thought that it is important to know about these myths and classical philosophes since ancient Greece and Rome were equipped with democracy and civilization. Thus their ideas might be used and welcomed. Marlowe makes ample use of mythology in his tragedies. However, in Faustus we see the failure of mythology. In spite of his love for mythology in this tragedy mythology fails to help Marlowe a lot in bringing it as a candidate side by side with Christianity. Though the giant of Renaissance drama welcomes mythology and proposes necromancy to his hero Faustus at the end of the tragedy it is Christianity which has the upper hand and the hero turns into a pathetic figure who is no longer arrogant and proud and is torn into pieces tragically.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.085
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in literature and languageSame topicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary CriticismFrench-language works237,207