Bibliographic record
Abstract
This cultural-historical reading of Les Liaisons dangereuses (1782) situates it in the context of the 1780s engagement with weights and measures reform in France. The protagonists of the novel resort to a language of weights and measures in order to appraise their world which is fraught with material, sexual and ideological signification. Contemporary discussions of weights and measures often incriminated the seigneurial regime as principal abuser of the system, invoking in the process philosophical connotations of “the just measure” or socially responsible moderation and equity. As well, the human body remained at this time the principal benchmark for constituting the systems of measurement with which the French of the 1780s gauged and appraised their physical and imaginative environments. Hence, Choderlos de Laclos’s famous letter-novel of 1782 provides a telling case study allowing us to determine how far the uniquely resonant universe of contemporary fiction reflects and inflects the metrological concerns of its society as well as potentially suggesting ways in which people still measure and weigh the world atavistically, according to pre-metric and pre-decimal, corporeal means.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".