MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983026676 · doi:10.2307/1261559

The 'Opicius' Poems (British Library, Cotton Vespasian B.iv) and the Humanist Anti-Literature in Early Tudor England

2002· article· en· W1983026676 on OpenAlexaff
David R. Carlson

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance Quarterly · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryHumanismEPICLiteratureReading (process)Performance artArtPresentation (obstetrics)HistoryClassicsArt historyPhilosophyTheologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the format of a catalogue manuscript description, this study analyses the design and contents of a manuscript presented to king Henry VII of England about 1492-93. Featuring an epic account of the 1492 English invasion of France and a pastoral dialogue praising the domestic peace imposed by the Tudor regime, the five poems are the work of a little-known Italian writer “Johannes Opicius, “ in a stylishly written and decorated copy. Like other contemporary presentations, especially the works of the early Tudor laureate Bernard Andre”, the verse is as classicizing as the design is Italianate and humanist, innovative features for English literary culture. Like other cognate products, however, Opicius’ performance lacks properties usually associated with literature. The work was not for reading nor for recirculation, owing its inspiration solely to a wish to gratify the monarch. The presentation was chiefly a matter of performing the magnificence of the king.

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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance QuarterlySame topicMedieval Literature and HistoryFrench-language works237,207