MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7042074561

Missing Medea

2013· dissertation· en· W7042074561 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSimon Fraser UniversityCanada Council for the ArtsStrong
KeywordsTSG101PretextRidiculousParaphernaliaCircumstantial evidenceGestational period
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The focus of this project is to (re)create a trilogy of plays that bring the unfamiliar and largely forgotten stories of the tragic heroine Medea of Greek mythology to the modern stage. In each case the selection of narrative detail and decisions regarding presentational style are part of the ongoing task of re-visualizing antiquity. The first play, Cupid’s Arrow, focuses on the beginning of Medea’s doomed and tragic love for Jason as it was engineered by the goddess of marriage Hera and it draws from fragments of Sophocles’ play, the Colchides (Women of Colchis). The second, The Daughters of Pelias, is recreated from fragments and the supposed narrative of a play (Peliades now lost) that was in Euripides’ first ever production at the City Dionysia in 455 B.C. The story centers on Medea’s deception of Pelias’ daughters, who end up slaughtering their father when hoping to prolong his life. The third play of the trilogy, After Medea, which takes place after the horrific ending of Euripides' surviving Medea, rotates its triangle somewhat. Instead of a young Corinthian princess upsetting the balance of Jason and Medea's union by distracting Jason's affections, it is a young Theseus whose arrival creates turbulence for Medea and her rescuer and new husband Aegeus. This play follows the presumed plot of two non-surviving “Aegeus” tragedies, one by Sophocles and one by Euripides. The dissertation attempts, in part, to redeem the character of Medea for modern audiences by placing before them, in dramatic form, some missing parts of her story. It thus follows a path similar to that of Margaret Atwood’s recent novel and play, The Penelopiad, which similarly reinterprets otherwise unfamiliar mythological evidence for the wife of Homer’s Odysseus. Such projects map out a methodology for such revisualization of classical mythology that does not limit itself to the surviving epics and tragedies. Appendices to the dissertation include a reworking of Euripides’ Trojan Women (produced at SFU in Spring 2012), and an essay on Homer’s Achilles that draws parallels between him and Medea.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1000.022

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSummit (Simon Fraser University)→Same topicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism→French-language works237,207→