MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1148843583 · doi:10.33137/rr.v34i1-2.16168

À la lisière de l’ « autre monde » Le Pérou dans la <i>Relatione breve</i> de Diego de Torres Bollo (1603)

2012· article· en· W1148843583 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Franco Pierno

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLatin American history and culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesRelation (database)Period (music)HistoryClassicsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1603, Diego de Torres Bollo (1550–1638), Jesuit procurator of the province of Peru, published in Rome his Relatione Breve, one of the first printed accounts of early Jesuit missionary activities in South America. The work was an instant success: in 1604 a second Italian edition was published in Venice, as well as translations into Latin (Antwerp) and French (Paris). The Relatione was typical of many Jesuit accounts of the period, that is, it consisted of a skillfully arranged montage of letters from the missions, written for the express purpose of attracting new vocations to missionary work in South America. To the detriment of this editorial success, with the exception of the major bibliographical repertories, de Torres Bollo’s text is rarely used and seldom cited by historians, and is even paradoxically absent in historical undertaking such as Rubén Vargas Ugarte’s Historia de la Compañía de Jesús en el Perú; furthermore, there is no modern edition, not even a diplomatic transcription, in the important Monumenta Peruana. With this contribution, I intend not only to inform those who read a little-known work, but also to demonstrate how it constitutes a decisive moment in the genesis of the “relation” genre in the first decades of written Jesuit communication.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and ReformationSame topicLatin American history and cultureFrench-language works237,207