MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915748963 · doi:10.3968/10525

Subversive Communicative Chaos in Edward Albee’s Selected Plays: An Absurdist Sketch of Modern Man

2018· article· en· W2915748963 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdullah H. Kurraz

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in literature and language · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Studies and Interdisciplinary Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConformityAbsurdityAbsurdismAestheticsIdeologyPsychoanalysisExistentialismEpistemologyEnvironmental ethicsPsychologySociologyPhilosophyLiteratureSocial psychologyLawArtPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the stances of communicative chaos, non-conformity and miscommunication that suggest the absurdist aspects of Edward Albee’s plays as postmodernist phenomena. Albee’s modern man lacks a mechanism of communication and fails to find a companionship that suits his mentality, ideology, and hopes. Albee’s plays serve as a cautionary discourse to reconcile conformity and non-conformity, and to warn against the inevitable bad consequences of their miscommunication and the collapse of values in human societies. Also, this paper examines the commonalities in both Albee’s plays and absurdity, where Albee fuses features of the Theater of the Absurd in themes which question man’s existence in the modern world, the lack of communication among people, and man’s non-conformity. Thus, by juxtaposing the opposites, the plays are able to generate many of their tensions and conflicts.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.036
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in literature and languageSame topicCultural Studies and Interdisciplinary ResearchFrench-language works237,207