MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225003084 · doi:10.3138/seminar.58.2.1

Textual Infection: Syphilis in Grimmelshausen’s <i>Courasche</i>

2022· article· en· W4225003084 on OpenAlex
Christopher Hutchinson

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminar A Journal of Germanic Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Literary, and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyphilisScholarshipLiteral (mathematical logic)Reading (process)SociologyLiteratureHistoryLinguisticsArtPhilosophyMedicinePolitical scienceLawVirologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scholarship on seventeenth-century concerns about print has highlighted how writers drew on diseases like syphilis as metaphors to criticize the spread of dangerous ideas through print. This essay argues that, in certain texts, the epidemiological threat of the printed text goes beyond the metaphorical and becomes literal. By examining the way Grimmelshausen presents syphilis in his 1669 novel, Courasche, and outlining how ideas of infection in the work intersect with concerns about printing, circulating, and reading texts, this essay demonstrates how literary portrayals of syphilis can also claim to have real, material effects on their readers.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it