MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248772891 · doi:10.33137/rr.v27i1.11734

Montaigne: "Essais"

2009· article· fr· W4248772891 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Robert Aulotte, Jean Larmat

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Literature and Criticism
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

sex-changed-although not by Venus."Again, one wonders whom this note is designed to help; readers who need to be told, for example, who Psyche and Circe are (Gallathea, note 67), will be very much in the dark about Iphis and lanthes.Surely a recounting of the main lines of the story would help the curious decide for themselves about Lyly's purpose in alluding to it.Daniel typically refers to classical authors by name only, with the occasional title included; more complete references would not constitute undue "scholarly encumbrances" to the general reader who is tackling Lyly in the first place.A few notes contain errors that should be corrected in any subsequent edition; note 6 to Campaspe mistakenly identifies Pallas as Venus rather than as Athena; note 27 to Sapho andPhao has the Greeks themselves actually taking the wooden horse into Troy; and note 64 to Gallathea assumes that Silenus is supposed to be an artist, whereas what Lyly is alluding to, and wittily reversing, are the ancient images of the ugly satyr, Silenus, which concealed within themselves wondrous images of the gods.Note 80 to Gallathea ("'Jovialist' and 'Venerian' mean born under the signs of Jupiter and Venus") is misleading since Jupiter andVenus are not zodiacal signs, nor are the signs ruled by them the whole story; a better note that would still avoid the complications of astrological theory would read: "one whose character and destiny are strongly influenced by the planets Jupiter and Venus,," or "are born when the influences of the planets Jupiter and Venus were especially strong."Finally, there are a few typographical errors: 106, "betwween;" 145, "Diana's numphs;" 370, note 74 is missing the slash between the lines of verse; 372, note 18, "King" should read "Queen," and 381, note 180 seems to be missing a word.Lyly as dramatist deserves a wider and more sympathetic audience than he has hitherto received this century, and Daniel's edition, despite the limitations noted above, is generally well-tailored to fostering that renewal of appreciation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and ReformationSame topicFrench Literature and CriticismFrench-language works237,207