Bibliographic record
Abstract
The many forms of hospitality in early modern Europe are an unjustly under-studied topic, as the editors of this fine collection of essays (David B. Goldstein and Marco Piana) point out. Apart from notable exceptions such as Felicity Heal’s book on England, there is still much to know about the theory and practice of hosting (offering food, drink and especially accommodation to others) in this era. And yet, as these essays collectively show, this is a both a timely and an important topic that sheds new light on key aspects of early modern society and culture, from the treatment of migrants and the poor, to the ever more frequent encounters with ‘Others’ of different races and religions in this early era of globalisation. The Introduction and multiple chapters illustrate how hospitality was seen as a ‘dangerous and vexatious’ practice as much in the past as it is in the present. Theoretically a virtue and an obligation according to Christian and other religious traditions, opening one’s house or sharing one’s table (or even bed) was seen in practice as inviting in the risk of physical or spiritual danger, especially if the guest was a stranger and/or belonged to a different faith.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.008 |
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".