MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003459211 · doi:10.1086/706604

Mechanical Toys: Sir Philip Sidney and the Lyric

2020· article· en· W3003459211 on OpenAlexaff
Roger Kuin

Bibliographic record

VenueSpenser Studies A Renaissance Poetry Annual · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusicology and Musical Analysis
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtArt historyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a tone both playful and serious, this essay explores Sidney’s use of the term “toy” to describe the purpose, artfulness, and aesthetic force of his lyric poems through an extended discussion of the singing match between Lalus and Dorus in the First Eclogues and the double sestina of Strephon and Klaius. A careful consideration of the technical virtuosity of Sidney’s verse and its possible provenance leads to an argument for the lyric’s distinctive modes of evoking virtue and excellence.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpenser Studies A Renaissance Poetry AnnualSame topicMusicology and Musical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207