MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904186499 · doi:10.1093/crj/cly012

Poppies, scarlet flowers, ‘this beauty’: H.D.’s<i>Choruses from the Iphigeneia in Aulis</i>and the First World War

2018· article· en· W2904186499 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueClassical Receptions Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural History and Identity Formation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeautyWitnessNarrativeMaturity (psychological)QueerLiteratureAmbivalenceSpanish Civil WarHistoryArtAestheticsSociologyGender studiesLawPsychologyPolitical sciencePsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modernist poet H.D.’s experimental translation of Euripides’ Iphigenia in Aulis (1916), published during WWI, shows H.D. pursuing this project to explore how wartime can provide opportunity for women to achieve extraordinary cultural authority in positions not generally afforded women, such as those of direct witness, storyteller and news-bringer, and heroic sacrificial victim. This translation project both registered and fostered the emergence of H.D.’s feminist queer thought about how ‘New Women’ of her time might come of age differently from women of generations past — through new narratives, new varieties of authority, and new forms of maturity. Finally, the essay complicates received ideas about H.D.’s ‘pacifist’ and critical stance on war, reading her translation choices as structured by an ambivalent fascination with both wartime ‘beauty’ and forms of advancement made distinctively possible for women by the circumstances of war.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.200 · 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