MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1874057031 · doi:10.33137/q.i..v35i2.23617

<i>Stabat Venus dolorosa</i> nell’<i>Adone</i> di Marino

2015· article· it· W1874057031 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Johnny L. Bertolio

Bibliographic record

VenueQuaderni d italianistica · 2015
Typearticle
Languageit
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRenaissance Literature and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Il presente studio intende verificare e sviluppare una linea interpretativa dell’Adone tracciata a più riprese da Francesco Guardiani (specialmente: La meravigliosa retorica 52–56; “I trastulli” 313; “A Christological Metamorphosis” 187–94) e già rilevata da P. Pozzi nel suo fondamentale commento (in Marino, L’Adone, vol. 2, 63): si tratta di quel costante innesto, nella figura e nella vicenda di Adone, di elementi appartenenti alla storia sacra e, specificamente, a Cristo e alla sua Passione. Si è parlato e si continua a parlare, a tale proposito, di “neopaganesimo” (Frare), il che indica quanto sia cruciale interrogarsi sugli scopi, se mai Marino ne avesse, e sugli esiti di questo giocare col fuoco della fede e del dogma in un’epoca poco incline al compromesso. In questo percorso, l’Adone sarà letto tenendo presenti, in particolare, la Lira e le Dicerie Sacre, due opere che, per quanto attiene ai carmi dedicati alla Passione, si illuminano a vicenda anche in forza della cronologia (Lira III e Dicerie, infatti, escono nel 1614): per parafrasare, grazie alla fecondissima produzione del Nostro, il motto dell’esegesi omerica di Aristarco, si proverà dunque a “spiegare Marino con Marino”.

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)0.003
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.008

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuaderni d italianisticaSame topicRenaissance Literature and CultureFrench-language works237,207