MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2489291759 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511998409.003

Coming adrift: The limits of reconstruction of the cyclic poems

2015· book-chapter· en· W2489291759 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan S. Burgess

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2015
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPoetry Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryGeologyArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What is the ‘Epic Cycle’? The Greek is epikos kyklos , which literally means ‘epic circle’. Kyklos in its most primary meaning refers to an object of circular dimensions (e.g. wheel, shield), but it could also be applied metaphorically to a compilation of literary material. The ‘Epic Cycle’, simply put, is a collection of epic verse. Unfortunately the Epic Cycle is now lost, except for various kinds of fragments, testimony and summaries. Our challenge is to sort through this evidence and reconstruct the Epic Cycle as best we can. Many learned and rewarding attempts to do so can be found in this Companion . But all attempts, not least my own, ultimately result from guesswork that depends on arbitrary assumptions. Models of reconstruction The Epic Cycle included theogonic beginnings and the heroic wars at Thebes and Troy. The Trojan War and its aftermath have attracted the most attention, both in antiquity and in the modern world, because of its relevance to the Homeric poems. Indeed the Epic Cycle's useful contextualization of the Iliad and the Odyssey has led to the common conception of it as something secondary to ‘Homer’, both in chronology and value. For hermeneutic purposes I will call this the ‘Homer-centric’ model, which has been dominant from antiquity onward. In its starkest form, this model posits that a series of poems were composed on the basis of the Homeric poems, though falling far short of their poetics, in order to surround them with prequels and sequels. A different model, which I will label ‘Systemic,’ would link the Epic Cycle broadly with various material about the Trojan War in ancient literary and artistic traditions. In its starkest form, this model suggests that the Cycle poems represent mythological and epic traditions that were earlier than the Homeric poems. Adherents to both models have dedicated themselves to the scholarly sleuthing required to make sense out of the scanty evidence. But these two models vary widely on their conception of how the Epic Cycle relates to the Homeric poems and what role they generally played in early epic.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.033
Scholarly communication0.0120.012
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.141 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations48
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicPoetry Analysis and CriticismFrench-language works237,207