MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Death, New Land, and New Nature in Dostoevsky’s Novel The Idiot

2020· article· en· W3100903062 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tatiana A. Kasatkina

Bibliographic record

VenueDostoevsky and World Culture Philological journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscourse Analysis and Cultural Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRussian Science Foundation
KeywordsIdiotImmortalityHumanityDreamPlot (graphics)DisgustDehumanizationPrisonPsychicDéjà vuAestheticsLiteraturePhilosophySociologyPsychoanalysisPsychologyArtCriminologySocial psychologyCognitive psychologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article is dedicated to the analysis of the main concepts in the novel The Idiot aimed at a better understanding of its most enigmatic scenes. The main word of the novel is “new”, both on a plot level and on a deeper, ontological one. The novel vividly demonstrates how the manifestation of the “new” is actually connected with emotions that are very different from the ones we could suppose by default; in fact, it is connected with fear, disgust, a sense of disruption and destruction, radical transition, and unknown. Dostoevsky shows how this kind of human relationship with the “new” is an effective way to enclose man in the narrow prison of earthly life, denying immortality and resurrection; it also encloses man in the narrow prison of social prejudices, denying the possibility for free growth of his humanity. The analysis focuses on the first scene at the Epanchyns’, the story about the soldier Kolpakov (the only thing we know about the father of the prince), and Ippolit’s dream about the non-scorpion and the Newfoundland dog Norma.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.019
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDostoevsky and World Culture Philological journalSame topicDiscourse Analysis and Cultural CommunicationFrench-language works237,207