MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231261959 · doi:10.1017/9780511819827

The Tempest

2000· book· en· W4231261959 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William Shakespeare

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2000
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTempestMainstreamVariety (cybernetics)Representation (politics)HistoryLiteratureArtArt historyPoliticsLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This edition of The Tempest is the first dedicated to its stage history. Drawing on a wide variety of sources, it examines four centuries of mainstream, regional, and fringe productions in Britain (including Dryden and Davenant's Restoration adaptation), nineteenth- and twentieth-century American stagings, and recent Australian, Canadian, French, Italian, and Japanese productions. In a substantial, illustrated Introduction Dymkowski analyses the cultural significance of changes in the play's theatrical representation, for example, when and why Caliban began to be represented by a black actor, and Ariel became a man's role rather than a woman's. The commentary annotates each line of the play with details about acting, setting, textual alteration and cuts, and contemporary reception. With extensive quotation from contemporary commentators and detail from unpublished promptbooks, the edition offers both an accessible account of the play's changing meanings and a valuable resource for further research.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0700.017

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.171 · 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
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

Citations35
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207