MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Understanding Medieval Manuscripts: St. Gall's Virtual Library

2009· article· en· W2000479693 on OpenAlex
Anna A. Grotans, Julian Hendrix, Bernice M. Kaczynski

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHistory Compass · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopularityContext (archaeology)World Wide WebThe InternetGallHistoryLibrary scienceComputer sciencePsychologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In 2005, the Stiftsbibliothek St. Gallen began digitizing its collection of medieval manuscripts. The creation of such virtual libraries available via the Internet is gaining in popularity with libraries, a trend that will radically ease the logistical constraints of studying medieval texts in their original context. While critical editions will continue to be an important tool for certain types of research, virtual libraries enable a wider community of scholars to engage with texts that are not amenable to critical editions or to ask questions that critical editions obscure. This article reviews the range of research that has centered around the study of manuscripts held at St. Gall, including school books, liturgical books, and patristic authors, and outlines the kinds of questions and insights that manuscript studies can provide for medieval history.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.091 · 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