MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1531154057 · doi:10.3138/flor.24.009

La <i>Bible</i> de Jean de Sy et la <i>Bible anglo-normande</i>

2007· article· fr· W1531154057 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFlorilegium · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Moyen Âge nous a légué un certain nombre de traductions bibliques. Pour le philologue moderne se pose constamment la question de la source à partir de laquelle elles ont pu être effectuées. Si le manuscrit que le translateur avait sous les yeux n’est jamais identifiable, il reste à déterminer le type de texte qu’il a pu utiliser. On sait en effet que la Vulgate n’était pas toujours la seule référence et qu’on la complétait assez facilementà l’aide d’autres histoires bibliques : les Antiquités judaïques de Flavius Josèphe, l’Historia scholastica de Petrus Comestor ou l’Aurora de Petrus Riga. Par-delà se pose cependant une autre question : le translateur effectuait-il toujours une traduction à nouveaux frais et ne lui arrivait-il pas de réutiliser, en l’adaptant quelque peu, un travail effectuépar un autre ? Paul Meyer avait montré, en son temps, que la Genèse livrée par le MS fr.6447 de la Bibliothèque nationale de France était un dérimage partiel de la Bible d’ Hermann de Valenciennes et d’un autre poème non encore identifié.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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