Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Western representations, food and sex are frequently connected and compared in an erotic context. A survey of Sanskrit poetry shows that it was not so in the context of ancient India, despite the kāmaśāstras’ dictates. Parts of women’s bodies are occasionally likened to certain items of food (mostly fruit and nectar), and can sometimes be drunk, but are rarely said to be eatable. Lovers who are madly in love or suffer from the pangs of separation lose their appetite, and in consequence become thin. In contexts of love-in-union, wine, but not food, is frequently consumed and appreciated for its aphrodisiac qualities. Except in some cases when the pairs of lovers are animals, or at least animal-like, descriptions of food consumption do not lead to the erotic flavour (śṛṅgāra-rasa), but rather lead to the comic (hāsya), sometimes disgusting flavour (bībhatsa-rasa). Food descriptions were probably considered improper for poetry, because food had too many unerotic associations, being a favourite topic of Sanskrit ritual, legal and medical treatises.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".