Bibliographic record
Abstract
It seems fitting to open this volume by paying tribute to the achievements of Professor Vern L. Bullough, a pioneer in the study of medieval sexuality, who sadly died on June 21, 2006. In fact, it was Bullough’s words that prompted us to hold the conference (Sex: Medieval Perspectives, University of St Andrews, 2004) from which this collection of essays stems. In his article “Sex in History: A Redux,” published in Jacqueline Murray and Konrad Eisenbichler’s edited volume Desire and Discipline: Sex and Sexuality in the Premodern West (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996), Bullough recalled his experiences as a historian of sexuality. Following the warning not to publish on the topic until he had achieved success in “a respectable field,” he still faced the embarrassment and disapproval of his colleagues, who introduced him as “a specialist in whores, pimps and queers, who occasionally deigned to do real research.” It was his determination in lobbying for sessions on the history of sexuality at the American Historical Association (AHA) conference, attracting an audience of over a thousand people, that motivated other scholars who were likewise devoted to the study of sexuality to push through a session at the International Congress on Medieval Studies at Kalamazoo. A call to action went up to promote the history of sexuality and it was a call many took up. Over the last few decades, the success of this call has been proven as the topic of sexuality has moved from the margins of academic study to the mainstream of current medieval scholarship. Perhaps some of the best testaments to this success are found in the edited collection of articles by Bullough and the respected historian and legal scholar James Brundage, the Handbook of Medieval Sexuality (New York: Garland, 1996), a volume which immediately illustrated the breadth of sources and arenas open to the historian of medieval sexuality.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.509 | 0.362 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".