Bibliographic record
Abstract
THESEUS: Well then, let them perform their play! SERVANT: Oh let them not! Truly it is not a pretty sight. These players embody the very definition of the word coarse. To call them rank amateurs would be to praise them. To call them hams would be to flatter them. They are an affront to the notion of what we call culture. Their histrionics amount to no more than does the screeching of alley cats. They butcher language with less finesse than what is required for the shovelling of manure, although the smell is no different. Indeed, what they dish out onstage has the consistency of dung. No sir, in the name of Thespes, let us not blaspheme the profession by calling them actors. They are clods, buffoons, dim wits, morons, imbeciles and simpletons. Oh sir, they are bad, awful, they stink, reek…. What they do is an insult to good taste and sensibility. I could go on and on…. (Renders, Midsummer Night’s Dream 5.1, 27)
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".