MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

“The riddle that the critic must solve”: V. Bryusov about Villiers de l’Isle-Adam

2021· article· en· W3172884008 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anfisa D. Savina

Bibliographic record

VenueLiterary Fact · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Literature and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRussian Academy of Sciences
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Adam smithAudience measurementLiteraturePeriod (music)PhilosophyArtClassicsHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This publication concerned with the problems of Valeriy Bryusov’s critical works and his interest in French culture. The aim of the paper is to introduce into scientific circulation the Bryusov’s text relating to the late French Romanticist Au. Villiers de l'Isle- Adam. Our introductory article gives a brief description of the literary relations between the Russian poet and the French writer. It is noted that for a quarter of a century Brusov turned to the work of Villiers de l'Isle-Adam as an editor, as a translator and as a novelist, attentive to the creative search of his predecessors. The published materials are a draft of Bryusov's article, made after 1910. In this text Bryusov expresses his attitude towards the French writer in detail and turns to the analysis of his short stories. The critic sums up literary fate in Russia of Villiers de L'Isle-Adam and other poètes maudits. In addition, Bryusov gives his vision of the level of the Russian readership and determines the degree of familiarity of the “average reader” with the French literature.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLiterary FactSame topicFrench Literature and CriticismFrench-language works237,207