MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407307243 · doi:10.33137/rr.v37i4.8743

The Neo-Christian Bias and Its Discontents: Milton Studies and the Case of <i>Samson Agonistes</i>

2001· article· fr· W2407307243 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elizabeth Sauer

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2001
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les études miltoniennes ont été dominées par ce que John Rumrich qualifie de «Milton inventé», personnage caractérisé par son didactisme et son orthodoxie d’après le «préjugé néo-chrétien» de la critique. Rumrich emprunte cette dernière expression à William Empson, qui, il y a des décennies, mit en cause la tendance à imposer sur Milton la cohérence et l’orthodoxie religieuse. Dans cette exercice d’analyse, l’auteur examine l’engagement de Milton avec l’hétérodoxie et l’hérésie dans Samson Agonistes, poème dont la réception a été déterminée par les «piétés régénératrices» des spécialistes ayant pris un parti conservateur.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.036
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and ReformationSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207