Bibliographic record
Abstract
En inscrivant La Duchesse d’Amalfi dans la Querelle des femmes, comme le suggèrent Linda Woodbridge et Christy Desmet, Webster reproduit les débats de la première modernité opposant philogynes et misogynes sur la question de la femme. Il en reproduit la rhétorique épidictique, place les questionnements de la Querelle (gynocratie, célibat, mariage et veuvage, accès au corps, nature de la femme) au centre de la pièce et convoque les représentations culturelles propres à chaque camp dans les débats qui opposent la Duchesse aux Aragonais. La monumentalisation de la Duchesse apparaît dans cette perspective comme son inscription dans le catalogue des exempla invoqués de part et d’autre. Cependant, le propos de la pièce, semble-t-il, n’est pas tant de prendre position dans la Querelle, comme le signalent en creux les incertitudes de la critique, que de tenir un propos herméneutique sur la Querelle, et notamment sur la construction des polarisations qui la constituent.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".