Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the noise associated with the Roman holiday of Saturnalia. The loud noise and chaotic sounds associated with the celebration of the festival are set against the traditional “free speech” of the Saturnalia, i.e., the license to speak freely granted to slaves and the lower classes for the duration of the holiday. Through analysis of the noise and speech associated with the festival in the contemporary poetry of Martial and Statius, the paper illuminates some political aspects of individual and collective speech and noise-making in Flavian Rome. Cet article porte sur le bruit associé à la fête romaine des Saturnales. Les bruits forts et les sons chaotiques associés à la célébration du festival sont mis en parallèle avec la traditionnelle « liberté de parole » des Saturnales, c’est-à-dire la permission de parler librement accordée aux esclaves et aux classes inférieures pour la durée de la fête. Par l’analyse du bruit et du discours liés au festival dans la poésie contemporaine de Martial et de Stace, cet article met en lumière certains aspects politiques du discours et de la cacophonie, produits individuellement ou collectivement, dans la Rome de l’époque flavienne.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".