MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bridge Essay: Modern Poetry as a Global Phenomenon

2019· other· en· W2996150433 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Lupke

Bibliographic record

VenueA Companion to World Literature · 2019
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPoetry Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryLiteratureChinaHistoryIdeologyGlobeAsideHaikuAlienationAestheticsPhilosophyArtLawPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Modernism is the first truly global literary movement in history and thus difficult to encapsulate in ideological or stylistic terms. Throughout the world, foundations of thought and aesthetics were undermined in the late nineteenth century. As a result, in places as far flung as France, Germany, and Great Britain on the one hand, and Japan, China, and Taiwan in East Asia on the other, as well as in Eastern Europe, Latin America, South Asia, and the Middle East, emerging writers everywhere were overturning received forms, contesting received notions of epistemology and morality, and creating poetry anew. In continental Europe, Nietzsche and Kierkegaard leveled devastating critiques upon state religion, metaphysics, and moral philosophy. The implications of this radical philosophical and religious break from established thinking reverberated through literary circles. In Japan, Masaoka Shiki and Yosano Akiko revamped haiku and tanka . In England and the United States, poets rewrote the rulebook for what constituted imagery and prosodic structures. In Chinese, traditional structures such as “regulated verse” shi poetry and ci lyrics were largely shunted aside in favor of free verse. These changes came in response to rapid industrialization and urbanization, innovations that made communication around the globe much quicker and easier, and sentiments of alienation and exile throughout the world.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.239 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueA Companion to World LiteratureSame topicPoetry Analysis and CriticismFrench-language works237,207