Bibliographic record
Abstract
Die 1621 uraufgeführte Tragikomödie in fünf Akten (Vers und Prosa), deren Erstdruck (Quarto) aus dem Jahr 1658 stammt, entstand in Zusammenarbeit von John Ford, Thomas Dekker und William Rowley. Die Kooperation mehrerer Autoren an einem Drama ist charakteristisch für den elisabethanischen und jakobäischen Theaterbetrieb: So sollte der große Bedarf an neuen Stücken gedeckt und das Publikumsinteresse an möglichst aktuellen Stoffen befriedigt werden. Das Drama knüpft an den Hexenprozess gegen Elizabeth Sawyer aus Edmonton an, zu deren öffentlicher Hinrichtung am 19. April 1621 der Geistliche Henry Goodcole die Flugschrift The Wonderful Discovery of E. Sawyer, a Witch verfasste. Der Zeitdruck, unter dem die drei Dramatiker standen, bedingte gewisse handwerkliche Mängel, z. B. die nicht ganz überzeugende Verknüpfung der drei Handlungsstränge: der tragischen Handlung um den Bigamisten Frank Thorney, die auf John Fords spätere Tragödien vorausweist; der Szenen um Elizabeth Sawyer, die für die reife Genre-Kunst Thomas Dekkers charakteristisch sind; und der burlesken Clownszenen, für die wohl William Rowley verantwortlich ist.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.119 | 0.014 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".