MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7128600096 · doi:10.4000/15nna

Shakespeare’s Human at Scale

2025· article· en· W7128600096 on OpenAlexaff
James A. Knapp

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de la Société française Shakespeare · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Philosophy and Science
Canadian institutionsHistorical Studies in Education
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)CosmologyRhetoricFocus (optics)Relation (database)Human life

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the way Shakespeare imagines the human in scalar terms. From Hamlet’s diminution of Godlike “man” to a “quintessence of dust” to Lear’s demand that the storm “Strike flat the thick rotundity o’th’ world” and “all germens spill at once / That makes ingrateful man,” some of the most celebrated passages in Shakespeare employ the rhetoric of scale to emphasize the place of the human in the cosmic order. I argue that recent theoretical articulations of scale help illuminate the way Shakespeare’s use of scale clarifies how the human was viewed in relation to both created nature and the divine cosmos broadly conceived. I focus on what scale theorist Joshua DiCaglio calls the “situated dislocation” that results from a subject’s awareness of their existence at discontinuous scales. I argue that Shakespeare routinely stages “situated dislocations” that both reveal the tenuousness of the human as a category in a shifting early modern cosmology and open possibilities for ethical human action.

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)0.002
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.023
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de la Société française ShakespeareSame topicHistorical Philosophy and ScienceFrench-language works237,207