Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the most recent issue of The Library , Nancy Peters Maude has suggested that four of the thirteen ‘Ajax’ pamphlets of 1596 extend the duration of the ‘known collaboration’ of 1597 between the printers John Danter and Edward Allde. Unfortunately, she seems unaware that ‘her’ identification of Allde as the printer of STC 12783 was anticipated in 1991 by the STC Addenda and Corrigenda. From there she goes on to credit Allde with Robert Robinson’s share of STC 12782, and wrongly ‘identifies’ Danter as the printer of not only Allde’s real share of that book (and, for good measure, the unnoticed contribution by Valentine Simmes) but also the whole of STC 12780–1 (both actually shared by Allde and John Windet). To resolve this confusion, this paper first explains and corrects Maude’s misattributions, and then more carefully identifies the printer or printers of each of the nine remaining pamphlets, concluding with a list that presents the essential facts about all thirteen.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| 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 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.006 |
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".