Typologizing the Dream / Le rêve du point de vue typologique. Ed. by Bernard Dieterle and Manfred Engel. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann 2022 (Cultural Dream Studies; 5) — Contents and Preface
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is nothing like a firmly established typology of dreams – simply because the taxonomies on which existing typologies are based vary widely: They can be oneirocritical, thematic, or based on dreaming characters or their responses, on narratological functions, etc. The essays in this volume will discuss a broad range of dream types, with a special focus on nightmares and erotic, funny, indigenous and children's dreams. Examples are taken from a great variety of cultures and historical periods. Their authors and artists include: Akinari, Barrie, Baudelaire, Benjamin, Black Elk, Buñuel, Burroughs, W. Busch, Calvino, Cantilo, Cao Xueqin, Cardano, Carroll, Coogler, Corkran, Cortázar, Crébillon fils, Dalí, Eco, Ende, Foer, Fuseli, Garnier, Gatore, Grévin, Grünbein, Guo Moruo, Hauptmann, Hawthorne, Hebbel, Heine, E.T.A. Hoffmann, Huysmans, Ilboudo, Ilibagiza, Kafka, F. Lang, Leiris, Li Yu, Malerba, Mizoguchi, Morgenstern, Mussorgsky, Nodier, Nolan, Okopenko, Pushkin, Radcliffe, Rimbaud, Robison, Schafer, Schiller, Schnitzler, Schwarz-Bart, P.B. Shelley, Soqluman, Storm, Szittya, Tamapima, Tchaikovsky, D.M. Thomas, Tristan L'Hermite, Valenzuela, Vava, Yourcenar, Yu Dafu, and many others
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it