MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285677159 · doi:10.29173/crossings73

Holiness and Horror: The Gendered Spectacle of Romantic Sleepwalking

2022· article· en· W4285677159 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Samson

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossings An Undergraduate Arts Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDiversity and Impact of Dance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubconsciousSleepwalkingRomancePsychoanalysisPower (physics)SpectacleHumiliationJealousyLiteraturePsychologyHistoryArtSocial psychologyLawPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approaching the turn of the nineteenth century, somnambulism took various forms on the European stage as a morbidly fascinating window into the subconscious. Franz Mesmer's somewhat divisive theory of animal magnetism, or "mesmerism," was nevertheless taking hold in medical circles, and its often-female subjects were mirrored through portrayals of vulnerable sleepwalking heroines on the stage. But where there was vulnerability, there was also sublimity– more elevated manifestations of sleepwalking also emerged here, such as in the allegedly subconscious composition of Samuel Taylor Coleridge's poem "Kubla Khan" (1797; 1816) and the divine, genderless power attributed to Joan of Arc in Friedrich Schiller's play Die Jungfrau von Orleans (1801). These and other portrayals of Romantic somnambulism provide a glimpse into the gendered subconscious as understood in the dramatic landscapes of late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth-century Europe. Ultimately, this research aims to uncover who is victimized and who is exalted by these somnambulistic states, and to unblur the lines between gendered presuppositions and medical realities.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.043
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0000.006
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.269 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrossings An Undergraduate Arts JournalSame topicDiversity and Impact of DanceFrench-language works237,207