Bibliographic record
Abstract
An Annotated Chaucer Bibliography 2005 Compiled and edited by Mark Allen and Bege K. Bowers Regular contributors: Bruce W. Hozeski, Ball State University (Indiana) George Nicholas, Benedictine College (Kansas) Marilyn Sutton, California State University at Dominguez Hills Gregory M. Sadlek, Cleveland State University (Ohio) David Sprunger, Concordia College (Minnesota) Winthrop Wetherbee, Cornell University (New York) Elizabeth Dobbs, Grinnell College (Iowa) Teresa P. Reed, Jacksonville State University (Alabama) William Snell, Keio University (Japan) Denise Stodola, Kettering University (Michigan) Brian A. Shaw, London, Ontario William Schipper, Memorial University (Newfoundland, Canada) Martha Rust, New York University Warren S. Moore, III, Newberry College (South Carolina) Amy Goodwin, Randolph-Macon College (Virginia) Cindy L. Vitto, Rowan College of New Jersey Richard H. Osberg, Santa Clara University (California) Brother Anthony (Sonjae An), Sogang University (South Korea) Anne Thornton, Tufts University (Massachusetts) Martine Yvernault, Université de Limoges Margaret Connolly, University College, Cork (Ireland) R. D. Eaton, Universiteit van Amsterdam (the Netherlands) Mary Flowers Braswell and Elaine Whitaker, University of Alabama at Birmingham Stefania D’Agata D’Ottavi, University of Macerata (Italy) Cynthia Ho, University of North Carolina, Asheville Richard J. Utz, University of Northern Iowa Rebecca Beal, University of Scranton (Pennsylvania) PAGE 565 565 ................. 16596$ CH15 11-01-10 14:08:30 PS STUDIES IN THE AGE OF CHAUCER Mark Allen, R. L. Smith, and Elaine Wong, University of Texas at San Antonio Joerg O. Fichte, Universität Tübingen (Tübingen, Germany) John M. Crafton, West Georgia College Robert Correale, Wright State University (Ohio) Bege K. Bowers, Youngstown State University (Ohio) Ad hoc contributions were made Brian S. Lee (University of Cape Town) and Jesús L. Serrano-Reyes. The bibliographers acknowledge with gratitude the MLA typesimulation provided by the Center for Bibliographical Services of the Modern Language Association; postage from the University of Texas at San Antonio Department of English, Classics, and Philosophy; and assistance from the library staff, especially Susan McCray , at the University of Texas at San Antonio. This bibliography continues the bibliographies published since 1975 in previous volumes of Studies in the Age of Chaucer. Bibliographic information up to 1975 can be found in Eleanor P. Hammond, Chaucer: A Bibliographic Manual (1908; reprint, New York: Peter Smith, 1933); D. D. Griffith, Bibliography of Chaucer, 1908–1953 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1955); William R. Crawford, Bibliography of Chaucer , 1954–63 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1967); and Lorrayne Y. Baird, Bibliography of Chaucer, 1964–1973 (Boston: G. K. Hall, 1977). See also Lorrayne Y. Baird-Lange and Hildegard Schnuttgen, Bibliography of Chaucer, 1974–1985 (Hamden, Conn.: Shoe String Press, 1988); and Bege K. Bowers and Mark Allen, eds., Annotated Chaucer Bibliography, 1986–1996 (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame, 2002). Additions and corrections to this bibliography should be sent to Mark Allen, Bibliographic Division, The New Chaucer Society, Department of English, Classics, and Philosophy, University of Texas at San Antonio 78249-0643 (Fax: 210-458-5366; e-mail: mark.allen@utsa.edu). An electronic version of this bibliography (1975–2005) is available via The New Chaucer Society Web page at ⬍http://artsci.wustl.edu/⬃chaucer/⬎ or directly at ⬍http://uchaucer.utsa.edu⬎. Authors are urged to send annotations for articles, reviews, and books that have been or might be overlooked. PAGE 566 566 ................. 16596$ CH15 11-01-10 14:08:31 PS ...
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".