Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the fall of 1653, Madeleine de Scudéry had just completed Artamène, ou le Grand Cyrus and not yet begun Clélie, histoire romaine. Along with several members of her Paris salon she took advantage of the first ever intra-mural mail system, inaugurated in August 1653: they exchanged letters in which they discussed everything from their feelings for each other to the topics for the next salon, known as “le samedi.” Scudéry and Paul Pellisson subsequently collected these letters and had them copied and bound to form a manuscript. The nineteenth-century owner of the manuscript titled it Chroniques des samedis, which has long encouraged scholars to think of it as merely the account of the salon meetings. Chroniques is much more than that, as it portrays in letters Scudéry's search for her next novel—its subject and especially its form—as well as displaying her creating fictions in letter form. The new penny post only operated for about three months, yet Scudéry's manuscript reveals the understanding that this form of communication gave her of the interface between material culture and literary culture, between postal systems and epistolarity.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".