Some 12th Century Textual Witnesses of the Family of the Ivonian Panormia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La formation ou processus de developpement de l'œuvre d'Yves de Chartres — son Decret, la Panormie et la Tripartite — est un exemple emblematique pour comprendre correctement l'histoire textuelle des collections canoniques medievales avant la fin du XII e siecle, et particulierement avant 1234. Les recentes etudes sur les collections canoniques anterieures a Gratien montrent clairement combien la notion meme de « collection canonique » a cette epoque differe de sa signification classique. Chez Yves, le concept correspond a son intention de presenter le droit canonique de l'Eglise dans son ensemble. En effet, selon lui une telle presentation devait favoriser le fonctionnement et la vitalite des institutions ecclesiastiques, en particulier le soin des âmes et le salut comme but final. Sa tentative de mettre en application l'integralite du droit canonique pourrait se realiser de diverses manieres; fondamentalement, elle a eu un lien fort avec les particularites de chaque institution ecclesiastique concrete. L'analyse strictement paleographique et codicologique des manuscrits de Saint-Petersbourg (Ermit. lat. 25) et de la Bibliotheque apostolique du Vatican (Barb. lat. 502) appuie suffisamment l'hypothese que, concernant le texte de l'œuvre d'Yves de Chartres, il faut preferer l'expression « familles textuelles ».
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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".