Women and Slaves in Greco-Roman Culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Introduction: Differential Equations Sandra R. Joshel, New England Conservatory of Music, USA and Sheila Murnaghan, University of Pennyslvania, USA 2. Female Slaves in the Odyssey William G. Thalmann, University of Southern California, USA 3. 'I, whom she detested so bitterly': Slavery and the Violent Division of Women in Aeschylus' Oresteia Denise McCoskey, Miami University, USA 4. Slaves With Slaves: Women and Class in Euripidean Tragedy Nancy Sorkin Rabinowitz, Hamilton College, New York, USA 5. Women and Slaves as Hippocratic Patients Nancy Demand 6. Symbols of Gender and Status Hierarchies in the Roman Household Richard Saller, University of Chicago, USA 7. Villains, Wives, and Slaves in the Comedies of Plautus Annalisa Rei 8. Women, Slaves and the Hierarcies of Domestic Violence: The Family of St. Augustine Patricia Clark, University of Victoria, Canada 9. Mastering Corruption: Constructions of Identity in Roman Oratory Joy Connolly, University of Washington, USA 10. Loyal Slaves and Loyal Wives: The Crisis of the Outsider-Within and Roman Exemplum Literature Holt Parker, University of Cincinnati, USA 11. Servitium amoris: amor servitii Kathleeen McCarthy, University of California, USA 12. Remaining Invisible: The Archaeology of the Excluded in Classical Athens Ian Morris, Stanford University, USA 13. Cracking the Code of Silence: Athenian Legal Oratory and the Histories of Slaves and Women Steven Johnstone 14. Notes on a Membrum Disiectum Shane Butler
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".