Ronsard, Figure de la variété. En mémoire d'Isidore Silver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sommaire: G. Defaux, «De Marie a Delie: Le cedre, le venin, la licorne et la Colonne du Dieu vivant»; J. C. Nash, «Per angusta ad augusta: Ronsard and the Renaissance Belief in Poetry as Therapy»; C. Yandell, «“L’amour au feminin”? Ronsard and Pontus de Tyard Speaking as Women»; F. Rigolot, «Ronsard et la theorie meliorative de l’imitation»; Ph. Ford, « “What Song the Sirens Sang...”: The Representation of Odysseus in Ronsard’s Poetry»; A. Moss, «Ronsard the Poet: Ronsard the Hermaphrodite»; R. Wooldridge, «Ronsard chez les lexicographes de la Renaissance»; M. Engammare, «Ronsard et Tyard versus Viret et Calvin a propos du temps»; Y. bellenger, «Le discours “Des vertus intellectuelles et moralles” prononce par Ronsard a l’Academie du Palais»; C. Skenazi, «L’ordre et la paix: une perspective de la dispositio ronsardienne»; H. Campangne, «Les histoires tragiques de Pierre de Ronsard»; S. Davidson, «Houel emule de Ronsard ?»; M.-D. Legrand, «Ronsard sous la plume de Du Bellay ou la mise en scene d’un programme poetique: a chacun son role et a chacun sa place»; J.-C. Carron, «Le dialogue amoureux et la poetique des discours philosophiques a la Renaissance: L’exemple de Pontus de Tyard»; D. Martin, «Ronsard dans l’œuvre de Guillaume Des Autelz»; C. H. Winn, «Gabrielle de Coignard, “Sur la mort de Ronsard” (1594)»; C. Jomphe, «Theorie et pratique de l’epitaphe dans la poesie heroique de Ronsard»; R. Campo, «Words on Passing/Passing on the Word: Ronsard’s Epitaphes and the Glimpses of a Graveside Poetic»; F. Rouget, «Ronsard et la poetique du monument dans les Œuvres de 1578».
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.012 |
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".