MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953952041 · doi:10.71781/14691

Japanese Macbeth : Shakespeare's role on the international stage

2018· dissertation· en· W2953952041 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ashley-Marie Maxwell

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsStage (stratigraphy)LiteratureArtHistoryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'étude des pièces de théâtres Shakespeariennes se limite généralement aux performances et aux adaptations effectuées en Amérique et en Europe. Cet ouvrage se concentre sur le théâtre de Shakespeare en Asie, plus particulièrement, celui au Japon. La pièce étudiée dans cet ouvrage s'intitule « Noh Macbeth » et est une adaptation de Macbeth sur la scène japonaise nô. Le but de ce travail est de comparer le théâtre élisabéthain avec celui du nô, et d'établir par la suite si ces deux styles ont des ressemblances au niveau de l’adaptation Shakespearienne. Pour se faire, je propose d’évaluer le rôle de Shakespeare sur la scène internationale. Aussi, il est important d’étudier l’historique de Macbeth, à partir de sa création et à travers le temps, en passant par l’homme historique qui se trouve à la base du récit. Finalement, en regardant la place du théâtre nô au sein de la culture japonaise ainsi que l’adaptation de Macbeth dans ce théâtre, il sera possible de voir que, puisque le théâtre élisabéthain a disparu, le style théâtral nô se prête bien aux œuvres Shakespeariennes.

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)0.001
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 score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 venueOpen MINDSame topicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary CriticismFrench-language works237,207