UNE SOURCE LATINE DE L'ODE IV, <scp>iii</scp> DE PIERRE DE RONSARD: ‘CONTRE CELUY QUI DESROBA SON HORACE’ (1550)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il n'est plus nécessaire de soutenir la thèse fondamentale selon laquelle Ronsard consulta et imita les poètes néo-latins d'origine italienne, de son époque et du siècle précédent. Parmi les pionniers de cette recherche dans les sources humanistes du poète français, la place centrale revient à l'éditeur moderne Paul Laumonier, qui, à partir de l'année 1914, a produit l'édition en vingt volumes des Œuvres complètes. Dans l'introduction générale qu'il attachait à cette édition monumentale, Laumonier annonce que l'élément central du commentaire qui accompagne les textes réside dans la recherche des sources de Ronsard. Ce qui domine dans notre commentaire, c'est l'indication des sources où l'auteur a puisé son inspiration, et des réminiscences qui ont excité sa verve ou nourri ses développements. Nous y attachons une grande importance, parce que leur connaissance permet seule de mesurer le degré de son originalité et d'en apprécier la valeur.1
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.003 |
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".