MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254997217 · doi:10.1057/9780230583764_1

Introduction

2008· book-chapter· en· W4254997217 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Darryll Grantley

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2008
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheater, Performance, and Music History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthosDramaQuarter (Canadian coin)Period (music)Metropolitan areaDominance (genetics)HistoryRepresentation (politics)Economic historyGeographyArtPolitical scienceVisual artsAestheticsArchaeologyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A notable aspect of the sixteenth-century revolution in English theatrical culture is the rapidly increasing dominance, from the last quarter of the century onwards, of London. With the advent of the commercial playhouses, theatre in the early modern period — previously of largely provincial provenance — became an overwhelmingly metropolitan phenomenon, generated in and focusing increasingly on London rather than the provincial towns and noble households that had been the home of most of the nation’s dramatic output up to this point. There was by no means a total disappearance of provincial theatre. Town troupes continued to exist throughout the country, and itinerant companies continued to play in household and other contexts, but the centre of gravity substantially shifted in a way that would permanently change the focus and ethos of drama. These developments inevitably brought about a change in its subject matter and preoccupations, which showed an increasing awareness from the late sixteenth century onwards of the new commercial theatre’s own urban location and the urban audience that had become its principal constituency. This investigation will be into the various ways in which that fact impacted on the representation and perceptions of the metropolis in the theatre, how this evolved over time, what factors determined this evolution, and how this representation in turn reflected the changing culture of the period. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.864
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.167 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicTheater, Performance, and Music HistoryFrench-language works237,207