Bibliographic record
Abstract
While Germaine de Stal was raised in an environment of constant dialogue and interchange and while this conversational acumen is transplanted into her literature, there is another dimension to her work that instead emphasizes a more ineffable form of expression, which she integrates with her conception of enthusiasm, and into a cosmopolitan vision. The French Revolution's early dreams for increased equality seemed to have dissipated for women amidst the authoritarian nature of the Napoleonic period, but within the silence that remained, Stal saw hope for ongoing fulfillment of the seeds of the Enlightenment. Stal and Napoleon are frequently juxtaposed as two rival voices struggling over the soul of revolutionary France and Europe, with their antagonistic relationship oftentimes exemplified with the saying, "Bonaparte had so persecuted her that in Europe one had to count three Great Powers: England, Russia, and Madame de Stal." 1 At stake between Stal and Napoleon are two different silences and separate conceptions of the nation, a militaristic and oppressive view characterized by Napoleon's silence of reason, and the passionate ineffability of enthusiasm with which Stal's writing is profoundly imbued.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".