MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404443856 · doi:10.1353/phx.2023.a942855

Let the Subaltern Speak: Libanius’ Rewriting of Epic Heroism

2023· article· fr· W4404443856 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jan Stenger

Bibliographic record

VenuePhoenix · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIslamic Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEPICRewritingSubalternHistoryLiteratureComputer scienceArtPolitical scienceProgramming languageLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: One of Libanius’ Progymnasmata , an encomium, is devoted to the most unheroic character of the Iliad : Thersites. This essay analyzes how Libanius, in critical engagement with Homer and cleverly filling the gaps in the Iliadic episode, endeavors to rehabilitate Thersites in order to propose an alternative model of heroism that challenges the traditional heroic norms. L’un des Progymnasmata de Libanios, un éloge, est dédié au personnage le moins héroïque de l’ Iliade : Thersite. Cet article analyse de quelle façon Libanios, en adoptant une posture critique envers Homère et en remplissant intelligemment les blancs de l’épisode homérique, tente de réhabiliter Thersite afin de proposer une alternative au modèle classique de l’héroïsme, alternative qui remet en cause les normes héroïques traditionnelles.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.700
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhoenixSame topicIslamic Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207