Bibliographic record
Abstract
The early modern period from 1451 to 1770 represented some of the most fundamental changes in human events in world history. In Europe in 1451, one could be executed for suggesting that the Earth was not the center of the universe, and although the notion of the world as spherical had been known for centuries, a clear image of the entire globe only came into focus with the voyages and discoveries of Christopher Columbus and John and Sebastian Cabot, among others, around the turn of the sixteenth century. In China under the Ming, the empire was in constant conflict with Mongol and other forces. The South Asian subcontinent was mainly gripped by struggles involving the dominant Delhi Sultanate and the Vijayanagara Empire, south of the Krishna River. The 100 Years' War between France and England was finally grinding to a halt. In South America, outside the knowledge of European explorers, Machu Picchu was being erected by the great Incan rulers Pachacutec Inca Yupanqui and Tupac Inca Yupanqui. The seeds of globalism were sewn with exploration and navigation but conflicts between empires that sought regional domination were still the norm. By 1770, the Americas had endured well over 150 years of European occupation of various sorts, trade and communication were global, thanks to innovations in ship design and the use of the compass and gunpowder, talk of revolution and individual rights was in the air, and vernacular literature throughout the world abounded. In 300 years, humans went from entrenched regional identities, as vast as in some cases they were, to an awareness of tremendous differences and distances, even antipodal. Literature prior to the early modern period could be viewed as concentric levels of ecology known as biomes, to use Alexander Beecroft's nomenclature, of increasing size, but proximity, contiguity, and propinquity were still necessary. Literature by the eighteenth century was on the threshold of truly global connectivity where interaction no longer needed to be adjoining or incremental.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".