La Popelinière, Lancelot Voisin de. L’Histoire de France. Tome 3, 1561–1562. Critical edition by Paul-Alexis Mellet and Odette Turias under the direction of Denise Turrel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Having taken the history of France in the New World in English and French as a child (unaware that I had Huguenot ancestors on both sides of the family), I was familiar with Jacques Cartier, Sieur de Monts, Samuel du Champlain, and Étienne Brûlé, but it took time for me to come to Michel de Montaigne and then to André Thevet, Jean de Léry, Lancelot Voisin de La Popelinière (1541-1608), and others.When in the 1990s I was working on how the French and English used positively and negatively the example of Spain in representing the New World, I often went to the original editions mainly in Paris, Cambridge, London, Harvard and the John Carter Brown Library, and, regarding La Popelinière, there were no helpful new editions when I finished that research in 1997.This changed with Anne
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.004 |
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".