MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W403623659

Erwin Wedel, Ed. A. S. Puschkin (1799-1837). Beitrage Zum 200. Geburtstag Des Russischen Nationaldichters, 1789-1923

2009· article· de· W403623659 on OpenAlex
Jay Clayton

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGermano-Slavica · 2009
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicGerman Literature and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryGermanLiteraturePanegyricHistoryArtPhilosophyRomanceClassicsArt historyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Erwin Wedel, ed. A. S. Puschkin (1799-1837). Beitrage zum 200. Geburtstag des russischen Nationaldichters, 1789-1923. Schriftenreihe des Osteuropainstituts Regensburg-Passau, Band 17. Regensburg, 2003.114 pp. The echoes of the two-hundredth anniversary of Pushkin's birth are still to be heard, as collections appear of papers resulting from the many events that occurred to commemorate such an important date. The volume under review is a compilation of five essays by scholars associated in some way with the East European Institute in RegensburgPassau, Germany. The thread that unites the essays is Pushkin--here glorified as Russia's national poet--a slighly panegyric note that seems out of place against the serious, scholarly tone of the artices; but the articles, with the exception of the last, are all of a comparative nature, relating Pushkin to other writers and traditions. Rolf-Dietrich Keil of Bonn sets the ball rolling with a reconsideration of the question of Pushkin and Goethe. He contributes an interesting discussion of the nature of truth, focusing on the two poets' treatment of the legend of Napoleon in Egypt shaking hands with someone stricken with the plague. Keil suggests, convincingly to me, that Pushkin changed the date of his poem that treats the incident, Geroi, to flatter Nicholas I, who visited Moscow during the cholera to show there was no danger. The second, longer paper by Aleksandr Smirnov of MSU, deploys condiderable erudition to discuss the structure of the lyrical I in Pushkin's romantic poetry. Smirnov has studied carefully German theory of romantic subjectivity, and applies it to Pushkin. His analysis is interesting as far as it goes; however, it seems to this reviewer that the complex nature of Pushkin's poetry is far from being totally captured: such issues as the metapoetic nature of the poetry, and the near descent into a real, not simply conventional madness, need elucidation in order to obtain a complete picture of Pushkin's frequently paradoxical subjectivity. Heinz Kneip of Regensburg draws a comparison between Mickiewicz's Dziady III and Pushkin's Boris Godunov, rightly asserting that both works are dramas of ideas that engage issues of the nature of Russian autocracy, each dramatizing in its own way the conflict between authority and opposition, and drawing parallels between the Decembrists and the Polish uprising of 1830-1. Kneip could, however, have underlined more the paradox of Pushkin's relationship to autocracy--for obvious reasons, a more conflicted one than that of Mickiewicz. …

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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