Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the course of honouring Gareth Schmeling's Petronian scholarship, especially his founding and editing of the Petronian Society Newsletter , this essay reconsiders some of the time-honoured, still unresolved questions about Petronius and the Satyrica , notably Ira Priapi as the dominant plot motif, the precise point (comporting an analysis of John Lydus' discussion of ancient satire) and personal targets (if any - Trimalchio/Nero loom large here) of the novel, and (last but not least) the identity and date of the author with special reference to the Tacitean obituary and his absence from Suetonius and company. A concomitant bibliographical survey of modern Petronian scholarship underscores both main and subsidiary issues. Barry Baldwin is Emeritus Professor of Classics, University of Calgary, and Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. He has lectured and written on Petronius and ancient satire over the last forty years, publishing numerous articles and reviews, including regular contributions to the Petronian Society Newsletter from its inaugural issue to the latest.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".