Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette rapide étude des rythmes de la Tapisserie de Bayeux s’inscrit dans une réflexion bien plus large portant sur l’histoire des rythmes au Moyen Âge. Celle-ci concerne notamment les rythmes des images et ceux de la narration historique, ce qui justifie l’examen de la célèbre broderie. Cette étude croise l’analyse des bordures, des images de la bande centrale et des inscriptions latines. L’usage des temps verbaux suggère que l’oeuvre pouvait être commentée à haute voix lors de son exposition (attestée au 15e siècle) à l’occasion de la fête de la dédicace de la cathédrale de Bayeux. La répétition et la variété des formes, des couleurs, des sons, les accélérations et les ralentissements du mouvement des cavaliers et des fantassins, et même les temps d’arrêt et les retours en arrière, donnent à la broderie son caractère rythmique exceptionnel.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
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".