Le Avventure di Pinocchio /The Adventures of Pinocchio the Puppet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
inevitable impact of increasing literacy, particularly female literacy, especially in the center and north of the peninsula, reveals itself through the stories (both from the perspective of the characters as from that of the intended reader); similarly the unstoppable focus on the new roles for women in post-Risorgimento Italy is reflect- ed.It may be true that none of the authors here ever mentions fundamental femi- nist works by Luisa Anzoletti, or sculptress Adelaide Pandiani Maraini, nor the influence of foreign Italophiles such as Jessie Hillebrand, Alice Werner or Vernon Lee who worked assiduously to promote Italian literature in English translation; the names of the Cecchini sisters, (Caterina and Laudomia Zanoboni), of the Pasolinis (Angelica and her sister-in-law Maria), and countless others may be silenced even in this volume, but in the short stories their ideas insist on inserting themselves, willy niliy, into the fictional fabric of the narrative.Readers of the time came to expect and look forward to these and similar stories, feuilleton inspired, in the Illustrazione italiana, the Fanfiilla della Domenica, the Perseveranza and other similar periodicals; they wanted to be delighted, they wanted to be informed, and in the manner of De Amicis' Cuore, they wanted to witness the building of a new Italy.In reading the preface and post-face I was particularly struck by the sensitivity of Romani and Arslan to the cultural memory of this nineteenth-century
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.003 |
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".