MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W349675815

Baseball: The Tenth Inning

2011· article· en· W349675815 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Francesco Ardolino

Bibliographic record

VenueNine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican Sports and Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower (physics)MantraBeautyArt historyHistoryArtMedia studiesAdvertisingLawAestheticsSociologyPolitical sciencePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Baseball: The Tenth Inning. Produced and directed by Ken Burns and Lynn Novick. PBS, 2010.4 hrs. Frank Ardolino The original Emmy Award--winning, nine-part documentary Baseball, which was broadcast on PBS in 1994 during players' strike, was seen by more than 43 million viewers, making it most watched film in PBS history. (1) The series covered 1839 to 1992, and it was intended in some measure to provide an antidote to disenchantment with baseball following termination of 1994 season. Baseball may have broken down as result of mutual greed and power games of players and owners, but Burns unfolded glorious history of America's game to compensate for stoppage on field. After completing his magnum opus, Burns was determined not to deal with subject again, but when he saw resurgent popularity of game during ensuing sixteen years, he decided to chronicle what he calls baseball's new age. (2) But this golden age has an ignominious shadow over it, and The Tenth Inning both extols beauty of game on field and laments problems raised by some players' use of steroids and related performance-enhancing drugs. Burns prefaces two-part program with mantra that no matter what happens off field, it's still a great game. Even opening ad for Bank of America celebrates healing pastoral powers of baseball throughout years. However, Burns's consolatory motto contains a false dichotomy: drug use may have occurred off field, but its effect is felt on field. It's impossible to separate game into two distinct categories because they are inextricably connected. Barry Bonds looks great hitting home runs throughout documentary, and, on one hand, we are asked to celebrate his prowess, but, on other hand, our suspicion that his Ruthian blasts are fueled by drugs undercuts our admiration. To support positive theme, players are shown making a succession of superlative plays, and various ball fields are presented in all their green glory. Star players like Ichiro Suzuki, Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Omar Vizquel, and Pedro Martinez provide heroic images to thrill fans. Mixed inextricably with these memories, however, is specter of drug use by home run titans, Sosa, McG-wire, and Bonds. In particular, Burns uses Bonds as Frankenstein's monster, with whom game will have to deal when he stakes his claim in the bottom of tenth as greatest player ever. Burns establishes a dramatic pattern to his presentation by invariably following a positive aspect of game, exemplified, for example, by Cal Ripken's consecutive games record. Ripken's record is cited as means of restoring fan support after hateful 1994 strike, with a return to Bonds mythos of supreme talent and Faustian ambition. The effect on baseball of rise and fall of Barry Bonds constitutes principal focus of four-hour program. The nature and structure of Tenth Inning is based on a dual temporal perspective: past events being chronicled and present from which our act of retrospection takes place. Because subsequent revelations have influenced our perception of past events, we obviously enjoy a superior perspective, but at same time through Burns's expert direction we can see even more meanings in these events than mere passage of time would provide. He assembles a visual and vocal mixture of film highlights; photos; voiceover narration; music; and commentary by broadcasters, writers, players, managers, and fans to create a multi-leveled and connected look at events he considers most important. Burns's characteristic pattern consists of a remark by narrator Keith David about upcoming scene, followed by footage of event unfolding or a photo that illustrates point being made, which is succeeded by a comment from Bob Costas, Mike Barnicle, Howard Bryant, George Will, or Tom Boswell, among others, all of whom establish consistent personas in unfolding events. …

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.819

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1820.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.155 · 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
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNineSame topicAmerican Sports and LiteratureFrench-language works237,207