MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414794952 · doi:10.1353/vcr.2024.a970813

"Undone by the Blood": Bloodborne (2015) and the Human Cost of Medical Progress

2024· article· en· W4414794952 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Molly Boggs

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature, Film, and Journalism Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)Human healthPreconditionOrder (exchange)Medical practiceHuman lifeMedical costs

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: The 2015 action role-playing game Bloodborne takes place in a nightmarish Victorian city, a centre for medical treatment that has been overrun by monsters as a result of uncontrolled scientific research. Weapons, items, and game mechanics emulate nineteenth-century medical technologies such as whole blood transfusion and anatomical dissection. Bloodborne offers a critique of an important legacy of the nineteenth century: the widespread social acceptance of human suffering as a necessary precondition for medical progress. As players unravel Bloodborne 's medico-Gothic horrors, they are compelled to rely on exploitative medical technologies in order to progress in the game. Players must grapple with the same moral questions that troubled the Victorians as they witnessed the gruesome beginnings of modern medical practice.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.014
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.285
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorian reviewSame topicLiterature, Film, and Journalism AnalysisFrench-language works237,207