Bibliographic record
Abstract
The honorand of the present volume, Gareth Schmeling, has played a major part in developments arising from Perry's authoritative study The Ancient Romances (1967). This paper discusses Perry's approach to the problems inherited from Rohde's magisterial Der griechische Roman of 1876, and evaluates his contribution to interpretation of the genre. It analyses Perry's work and attempts to indicate both the advances it inspired and problems that Perry himself created. The Ancient Romances constituted a major reassessment of the novel and stimulated interest in it; subsequent approaches to its study are considered. Bryan Reardon taught in Canada, U.K., U.S.A, France; retired in 1994. Principal publications: Courants litteraires grecs des IIe et IIIe siecles apres J.-C. , Paris 1971; Collected Ancient Greek Novels , Berkeley - Los Angeles 1989 (ed.); The Form of Greek Romance , Princeton 1991; Chariton, Callirhoe , Leipzig 2004 (Teubner). He organized the first ICAN (Bangor, Wales) 1976.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".