MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251954136 · doi:10.3138/utq.80.1.089

The Beckettian Mimesis of Time

2011· article· en· W4251954136 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eric P. Levy

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSamuel Beckett and Modernism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)Relation (database)Consistency (knowledge bases)IllusionEpistemologyAestheticsContrast (vision)PsychologySociologyPhilosophySocial psychologyCognitive psychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceLawPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study is the first to examine the Beckettian representation of time in relation to the conceptual complexity of time itself – the cluster of concepts informing the idea of time, philosophically construed. There is no consistency in the representation of time in the Beckettian opus. For fundamentally time is relegated to the status of illusion, as the driving aim of Beckettian texts is to express an abiding mentality or attitude toward experience which does not change and remains impervious to local circumstance. At bottom, the Beckettian attitude toward experience construes awareness in terms of the unremittingly uniform unpleasantness of suffering it. In contrast to the Kantian dispensation, in Beckettian mimesis time is not a condition preceding experience, but a conclusion drawn from experience and a means of expressing that experience. Analysis of the diverse and complex Beckettian constructions of time enables deeper understanding of the texts in which they occur.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.022
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicSamuel Beckett and ModernismFrench-language works237,207