Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract . — The lai of Sir Orfeo is a medieval Middle English narrative which merges Greco-Roman, Celtic and Christian elements. It takes a well-known story, that of Orpheus and his doomed wife Eurydice, and changes it into a tale of lovers who overcome death. By doing so it breaks with the traditional katabasis of the Thracian hero . Instead of a downward movement into hell, the main character, Orfeo, travels horizontally out of the human world into the realm of fairy. The descent is transposed on to Orfeo himself; it is a personal descent of a king to the life of a hermit. Additionally, the standard Orphic ending is rewritten: through humility and chivalry Orfeo and his lover, Heurodis, are reunited. This article examines these divergences from the classical Orphic myth and explores their implications on the Sir Orfeo narrative and their possible influences on the composition of the text. Resume. — Sire Orphee est un lai medieval conserve en moyen anglais dans lequel fusionnent des elements des cultures greco-latine, celtique et chretienne. Il s’inspire de l’histoire bien connue d’Orphee et Eurydice et la transforme en un conte relatant la victoire des amants sur la mort. Ce faisant, il rompt avec la catabase traditionnelle du heros thrace. Au lieu d’une descente en enfer, Orphee, le personnage principal, se deplace horizontalement hors du monde humain pour rejoindre le royaume de la feerie. La descente est transposee sur Orphee lui-meme ; il s’agit de l’abaissement personnel du roi au rang d’ermite. De plus, la fin traditionnelle du mythe est reecrite : grâce a l’humilite et a la chevalerie, Ophee et Heurodis sont reunis. Cet article examine les differences par rapport au recit mythique traditionnel et en analyse les implications sur le lai et leur possible influence sur la composition du texte.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".