Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il 2013 anno delle celebrazioni del Settimo centenario della nascita di Giovanni Boccaccio è stato testimone di un animato numero di convegni ed eventi in Nord America, in Canada e negli Stati Uniti. In quest’articolo, partendo dai convegni e seminari dedicati nel 2013 a Boccaccio e alle sue opere, si prova a dare un quadro dei «passaggi» e delle transizioni metodologiche e tematiche più rilevanti in un panorama di studi che si presenta in pieno fermento, mai banale e sempre rigoroso ed erudito, intricatissimo di spunti e innovazioni grazie anche al lavoro incessante negli ultimi anni dell’American Boccaccio Association e della rivista Heliotropia che rimane un forum di discussione imprescindibile, punto di riferimento per gli studiosi di Boccaccio e non solo in Nord America. Da questo breve resoconto degli studi di Boccaccio in America emerge un nuovo e promettente orizzonte di studi e l’indicazione di un percorso epistemologico preciso che invita a rimettersi allo studio rigoroso e costante di una delle tre corone, Giovanni Boccaccio la cui figura è stata in passato e a lungo all’ombra di Dante e Petrarca anche negli Stati Uniti. -- The year 2013 has been the year of the VII Centenary of Boccaccio’s birth. Starting from those seminars and events taking place in North America, in this article I tried to record the most relevant methodological and thematical “passages” and transitions in Boccaccio studies in an academic and scientic context that is in a continous ferment and never banal, always rigorous and learned, full of innovations and new perspective also thanks to the constant rigourous work of the American Boccaccio Association and the journal Heliotropia, an important forum of discussion and not only for American scholars of Boccaccio. This brief overview of Boccaccio studies in America proves to be very promising and invites to a rigourous study of one of the three crowns, Giovanni Boccaccio whose figure has been in the past in the shadow of Dante and Petrarch also in the United States.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".