Johnson, Eric, creator. Open Source Shakespeare. Edition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
as many users as desired from that institution's location); but for institutions on a limited budget, the authors offer applications for a "Robin Hood Ticket" for schools to "Pay What You Can." Individuals do not have this option, but can pay £1 or $1.25USD for 24 hours of access.For many individuals, a daily or monthly pass will likely be plenty.This site aims to be an exhaustive resource for every word in Shakespeare's plays, as demonstrated by the Glossary that claims to include all words in Shakespeare that "no longer exist in Modern English, have changed their meaning since Shakespeare's day, or have an encyclopedic or specialized sense that would make them unfamiliar to many modern readers." Combining a Glossary with the other features of the site-the "Circles" feature, the ability to see all lines for an individual character, the "Topics" and "Themes" features that explain mythological or historical concepts-suggests the greatest strength of the site: it collates multiple resources in one place.For students and practitioners, this is what could make it invaluable, but it also might be attempting to do too much.Looking up a word in the Glossary, for example, provides a brief definition and one Shakespearean example.A scholar could very well prefer the additional information and contextualization available through the OED.To sum up, Shakespeare's Words is a site that is undeniably useful as a teaching resource for secondary and post-secondary instructors who are introducing students to Shakespeare; more advanced researchers will likely prefer to collate their own grouping of digital sources.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.511 | 0.561 |
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".