Per l’edizione critica della rime di Baldassarre Castiglione e Cesare Gonzaga. Censimento e questioni attributive
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’articolo offre i risultati del primo censimento dei testimoni delle rime di B. Castiglione e C. Gonzaga. Alla luce della tradizione vengono affrontate le questioni attributive riguardanti i testi poetici: prima del presente intervento le rime ritenute castiglionesche erano 421 — tra le quali Euro gentil che in tempi recenti è stato definitivamente attribuito a Ercole Strozzi — mentre i testi gonzaghiani editi si limitavano a una canzone, un capitolo ternario e un sonetto. I risultati del censimento e l’analisi della tradizione suggeriscono di togliere a Castiglione 8 testi e assegnarli ad altri autori, rispettivamente Luigi Cassola (5), Giacomo Bonfadio (2) e Girolamo Volpe (1); per altri 3 testi si avanza l’ipotesi che siano attribuibili a Gonzaga e non a Castiglione. Di conseguenza, il corpus; gonzaghiano conta 10 componimenti, di cui 1 già prima stampato tra le rime dubbie di Bembo. Infine si fornisce l’edizione critica di 2 componimenti: Superbi colli, e voi sacre ruine e Io dico: Amor, chi dà tal vena.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 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".