MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417125256 · doi:10.1515/9781474403023

ReFocus

2016· book· en· W4417125256 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew Carter, Andrew J. Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenueEdinburgh University Press eBooks · 2016
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCinema and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFilm directorStudioBattleHollywoodStyle (visual arts)Metropolitan area

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New essays on the life and work of veteran Hollywood filmmaker Delmer Daves From Destination Tokyo (1943) to The Battle of the Villa Fiorita (1965), Delmer Daves was responsible for a unique body of work, but few filmmakers have been as critically overlooked in existing scholarly literature. Often regarded as an embodiment of the self-effacing craftsmanship of classical and post-War Hollywood, films such as Broken Arrow (1950) and 3:10 to Yuma (1957) reveal a filmmaker concerned with style as much as sociocultural significance. As the first comprehensive study of Daves’s career, this collection of essays seeks to deepen our understanding of his work, and also to problematize existing conceptions of him as a competent, conventional and even naïve studio man. Key Features The first and only detailed study of this important American screenwriter, producer and director An international collection of original essays examining Daves’s films, including Broken Arrow , 3:10 to Yuma , Task Force and Spencer’s Mountain Contributors Fernando Gabriel Pagnoni Berns, Universidad de Buenos Aires (UBA) Matthew Carter, Manchester Metropolitan University Adrian Danks, RMIT University Andrew Howe, La Sierra University Józef Jaskulski, University of Warsaw Sue Matheson, University College of the North in Manitoba Andrew Patrick Nelson, Montana State University Fran Pheasant-Kelly, University of Wolverhampton Joseph Pomp, Harvard University John White, Anglia Ruskin University

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEdinburgh University Press eBooksSame topicCinema and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207