MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379622325 · doi:10.1353/mlr.2004.a826997

The "Myth of Gentillet" Reconsidered: An Aspect of Elizabethan Machiavellianism

2004· article· en· W4379622325 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Modern Language Review · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRenaissance and Early Modern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMythologyQuarter (Canadian coin)LiteratureVariety (cybernetics)Face (sociological concept)PhilosophyHistoryMachiavellianismArtPsychoanalysisPsychologyLinguisticsArchaeologyPersonalityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role played by Innocent Gentillet's notorious attack on Machiavelli, published in 1576, in the Elizabethan response to Machiavelli's writings has been much debated. The recent tendency, notably in Felix Raab's 'The English Face of Machiavelli', has been to dismiss Gentillet's influence altogether. The present article puts together a number of allusions to, and borrowings from, Gentillet in the last quarter of the sixteenth century, some hitherto unpublished, which show clearly that a number of Elizabethan readers used Gentillet's book, and responded to him in a variety of ways.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.236 · 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