Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Callimachus' epigram Epigr. 27 Pf. (= AP 9.507, Gow-Page 56) in praise of Aratus is notoriously difficult of interpretation, but it is hoped that a new emendation and interpretation of the fourth line will resolve some of the difficulties, as well as lead us to a new interpretation of Meleager's reference to Aratus in AP 4.1. After discussion of the merits of manuscript readings and previous emendations of Epigr. 27, an emendation of a single letter in the penultimate word is proposed and supported by arguments based on scholia and citations from pre- and post-Callimachean texts, including Aratus' Phaenomena, the subject of the epigram in question. Finally it is argued that a dialectal jeu d'esprit based on Aratus' name in the second line of the Phaenomena is also present in Epigr. 27.4 and echoed by Meleager in AP 4.1.49.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".