Bibliographic record
Abstract
On October 26-8, 2000, there was a great gathering of Arthurian scholars from England, Canada, and the United States at the University of Rochester for Camelot 2000: A Millennial Conference on the Arthurian Legends . One of the purposes of the conference was to demonstrate the variety of approaches used by scholars studying Arthurian material and indeed the variety of material available for study; another was to demonstrate or suggest new areas for examination. This volume, which grew out of the papers at the conference, contains essays developed from the keynote addresses and from those papers that were overviews of a particular area of Arthurian Studies or that projected future trends in the field. (Papers that focused on a specific work or a specific problem have been published in a special issue of Arthuriana .) Arthurian Studies is a fascinating field in part because it is multi-disciplinary and it crosses linguistic, geographic, and temporal barriers. The very fact that the conference was widely sponsored - by Boydell & Brewer, the Rossell Hope Robbins Library, Rush Rhees Library, the College of Arts and Sciences, the Department of English, the Department of Art and Art History, the Department of Studies, the Department of History, the Department of Modern Languages and Cultures, the Department of Religion and Classics, the Cluster on Premodern Studies, and the Visual and Cultural Studies Program - suggests the range of interests that come together under the rubric of Arthurian Studies. The essays in this volume represent some of that variety. They also offer new slants on traditional problems, take new approaches to Arthurian Studies, or look to the future of the field. Norris Lacy presents a masterful survey of Arthurian Studies, and his suggestions for what is and is not needed might well serve as a prophecy that the field will continue to thrive only if it remains vital and flexible without abandoning its traditional strengths and if scholars remember the importance of comparative studies. Derek Brewer turns tos the concept of honor in the Morte Darthur , a topic he has been writing about for years; and yet anyone reading his essay and realizing that he is defining paradox as essential not only to Malory’s concept of honor but to the romance itself can immediately imagine dozens of articles and dissertations growing from this idea.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.476 | 0.293 |
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".