Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dante’s poem presents the humiliation of nakedness as part of the punishment of the souls in hell. But what about those in purgatory and limbo, and what about Virgil himself? Although most readers cannot imagine a naked Virgil, Dante gives only a hint of the state of clothing of the souls in limbo, and none at all concerning that of the souls in purgatory. Silence on this point was not an option for visual artists, however, and a survey of illuminations of the Commedia reveals some significant difficulties the poet’s reticence is able to avoid. It is suggested that Dante’s silence concerning the theologically expected nakedness of the souls in purgatory and limbo, including Virgil, is probably due to a reluctance to draw attention to what would otherwise be an awkward similarity between these generally positive figures and the souls of the damned. Dante-pilgrim as a living man is repeatedly described as clothed, but he is also repeatedly mistaken by those in hell as a soul newly arrived for punishment. Consideration of this contradiction reveals Dante’s preference for dramatic effect over logical consistency in presenting what he claims to have been an actual journey.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".