MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4299039845 · doi:10.33137/rr.v36i3.8646

Showing Like a Queen: Female Authority and Literary Experiment in Spenser, Shakespeare, and Milton

2000· article· en· W4299039845 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katherine Eggert, Doug A. Brooks

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueen (butterfly)LiteratureArtHistoryBiologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

galement les 45 Responces potiques dans lesquelles Des Roches entretient un dbat avec un pote ptrarquiste anonyme.Dans ses conclusions propos d'crivains individuels aussi bien que dans sa discussion de l'criture fminine ou masculine ou des conceptions masculines ou fminines de la temporalit, Yandell vite avec soin toute gnralisation facile.Elle trouve chez les auteurs qu'elle tudie une grande varit d'approches aux questions de la temporalit.Elle constate pourtant que les hommes share an insistence on time as a relentlessly progressive phenomenon (p.213) qui emporte la jeunesse et la force, et qu'il faut vaincre en cherchant une forme d'immortalit potique ou spirituelle.Elle trouve chez les femmes crivains peu d'exemples de cette proccupation avec l'immortalit potique (exegi monumentum) et aucune tentative de saisir le moment passager de peur de la vieillesse ou de la perte de la beaut (carpe diem).Les femmes crivains semblent s'intresser beaucoup plus l'utilisation cratrice du temps pour apprendre, pour crire, pour aimer.Yandell constate que the women poets [ . . .] challenge the notion of an antagonistic time to be conquered.[ . . .] [they] accord a much less prominent role to the inevitable march of Chronos in their works.[ . . .] [they] ultimately evince a temporal philosophy that seeks to acclaim the enduring qualities of the present (p.213-15).Chez elles, la temporalit est souvent cyclique et en volution, et met en valeur the processes of writing, meditating and discussing over the finished product of the book (p.145).L'auteur m'a convaincue de la validit de sa thse et de sa mthode, non seulement pour cette tude mais pour d'autres du mme ordre.Elle aurait pourtant pu renforcer le lien entre sa thse de base et certaines de ses analyses d'oeuvres et d'auteurs spcifiques ; les notions lies la temporalit se perdent parfois, restent implicites plutt que spcifiques.Je rpondrais volontiers son appel la fin du livre, a collaborative call for additions to [my] arguments (p.216), et j'espre que d'autres le feront aussi, aprs avoir lu ce livre des plus stimulants.Une telle discussion enrichirait notre lecture de tous ces auteurs.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and ReformationSame topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207