Bibliographic record
Abstract
If you mention the name of Minnette Gaudet to scholars of Old French, their first reaction—both rightly and wrongly—will usually be to think of the 1980 Special Issue of French Forum entitled The Nature of Medieval Narrative. Rightly, because the volume, which Minnette co-edited and which grew out of a conference held at the University of Western Ontario in 1977, proved to be a watershed for the encounter between narrative theory or narratology and medieval literature. Most students of medieval literature have in their personal library a dog-eared, much-perused copy of that collection of essays (in my case and, I suspect, in that of many others who were students when the volume came out, this consists of a copyright-violating xerox). But at the same time medievalists wrongly think so quickly of the Medieval Narrative volume for the simple reason that twenty-five years later too many scholars associate Minnette's name more readily with that volume than with her volume (s) of more recent work. Like the artist or actor who is too successful in a particular mode (Braque's cubist period or Bogey in his heyday), Minnette has occasionally had to wriggle out from under the success of her own work.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".