MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1512403370 · doi:10.3138/flor.18.003

Words in Favour of Women

2001· article· en· W1512403370 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Brian Merrilees

Bibliographic record

VenueFlorilegium · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval European Literature and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraiseMarginaliaPoetryLiteratureSubject (documents)Value (mathematics)HistoryIndex (typography)ArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thirty years ago I published in Medium Aevum a short article entitled "Words against Women." It was a brief edition and commentary on some anti-feminist lines found in the manuscript Vatican Reg. lat. 1659. The lines were used to fill up an empty column and seem to have been linked to a longer passage in the Vatican copy of a moralising debate poem, the Petit Plet by the Anglo-Norman poet Chardri. The Petit Plet lines are marked in this manuscript by drawings of hands with the index finger pointing to particular couplets that deal with the unflattering characteristics of women. If there are many medieval texts that clearly see women in an unfavourable light, there are, however, a few that speak out in praise of women; in this paper I present some aspects of one of those, an unpublished poem in defence of women that Professor Francoise Vielliard of the Ecole nationale des Chartes and I are in the process of editing. Though this paper may be intended primarily to remind us of that rather small literary current, it also underlines the value of hunting through manuscripts ostensibly devoted to one subject but where marginalia and fill-in material can reveal a few unknown gems which often pass unrecorded—or at least passed over in the standard catalogues.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0040.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.179 · 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
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
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFlorilegiumSame topicMedieval European Literature and HistoryFrench-language works237,207