Из истории рецепции классического балета в Японии в первой половине XX века
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today the Japanese are known as subtle connoisseurs of European ballet, nevertheless, their interest in Western classical dance started only about a century ago. The article discusses the perception of the activity of Italian choreographer Giovanni Vittorio Rosi in Tokyo in the 1910s, as well as the opinion of the Japanese public of the first Russian ballet tour. Whereas the first visit of Russian artists to Japan in 1916, primarily of a diplomatic nature, went almost unnoticed, the 1922 tour of the famous Russian ballerina Anna Pavlova radically changed the situation: both the public and professional Japanese artists discovered a whole new world of Western dance. The author suggests that a change in the perception of classical dance in the first quarter of the 20th century is associated with the gradual penetration of ballet into everyday visual images — advertising and printed materials. The article for the first time presents the parallels between the posters of the Mitsukoshi department store, created by the Japanese artist Hisui Sugiura, and the ballet posters and photographs of Anna Pavlova.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.081 | 0.171 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".