MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Homer's Iliad and the Problem of Force

2023· book· en· W4377021290 on OpenAlex
Charles H. Stocking

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilologyUtterancePoetrySubject (documents)Interpretation (philosophy)PhilosophyLiteratureExpression (computer science)EpistemologyLinguisticsArtSociologyComputer scienceFeminism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Beginning with the work of Simone Weil and Bruno Snell, the topic of force has long remained a problem of interpretation for readers of Homer’s Iliad. This book therefore offers the first full-scale treatment of the language of force in the Iliad from both philological and philosophical perspectives. Each chapter explores the question of Iliadic force by way of its reception in the French structuralist tradition and evaluates those receptions through contextualized poetic readings. By combining philological and philosophical perspectives, this book demonstrates that each term for force in the Iliad gives expression to distinct relations between self and “other,” while each utterance on force also calls into question the very relations that it seeks to establish. Thus, the very topic of force allows us to reconsider what it means to be a human subject in Homeric poetry.

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.360
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClassical Philosophy and ThoughtFrench-language works237,207