MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391312749 · doi:10.33137/rr.v41i4.32459

Knutson, Roslyn L., David McInnis, and Matthew Steggle, eds. The Lost Plays Database

2019· article· en· W4391312749 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paul Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheatre and Performance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDatabaseArtLibrary scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Lost Plays Database is an open source Wiki that catalogues what we know about lost plays from the early modern theatre.It is fast becoming an invaluable resource to the student or scholar interested in the period's drama.The editors-Roslyn L. Knutson, David McInnis, and Matthew Steggle-not content to join the ranks of those who decry how little remains from the period's theatre, have curated a database that shows just how much can be learned from the study of that which is lost.Rather than adhere to a lost/not-lost binary, the database offers degrees of "lostness": it is "a continuum, not an absolute state." 1 Such a fact is made clear by the entries in the database.Readers can peruse entries with several thousand words, like the one for the Late Murder in White Chapel, or Keep the Widow Waking, or be met with a red link, signalling a blank page for an entry, meaning information about plays like the anonymous Pontius Pilate appears agonizingly out of reach.This is no criticism: before the editors undertook their work, all lost plays were effectively empty database entries.And the last major word on lost early modern plays had been C. J. Sisson's Lost Plays of Shakespeare's Age in 1936.The database has recently migrated from lostplays.org to being hosted on the Folger Shakespeare Library's site.Those familiar with its old home will note a quiet move away from the Wikipedia-style appearance for the site.The "deep red hues of wax seals" chosen to signal the site as a "scholarly research tool" remain though, as does the search-bar and side-bar.2 Entries themselves follow a uniform style with a "Contents" box at the top of each page, hyperlinked to find each section in an entry.Records contain sections like "Historical Records, " "Theatrical Provenance, " "Probable Genre(s), " "Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues, " "References to the Play, " "Critical Commentary, " and "For What It's Worth." Each is a gold mine, often replete with pictures, links, 1.David McInnis and Matthew Steggle, "Introduction: Nothing Will Come of Nothing?Or, What Can We Learn from Plays That Don't Exist?, " in Lost Plays in Shakespeare's England, ed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0090.015
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.042

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and ReformationSame topicTheatre and Performance StudiesFrench-language works237,207