MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034913112 · doi:10.4000/clio.229

Lesley SMITH et Jane H. M. TAYLOR (dir.), Women and the Book : Assessing the Visual Evidence, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, London, The British Library, 1997.

2000· article· en· W2034913112 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueClio · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLibraries, Manuscripts, and Books
Canadian institutionsECW Press (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtSAINTArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet ouvrage collectif, fruit d'un colloque tenu au College Saint Hilda d'Oxford au cours de l'été 1993, réunit quatorze contributions qui ont pour point commun d'interroger la relation entre la femme et le livre au Moyen Age exclusivement à partir des images. D'où la participation de la British Library qui accueille ce volume dans sa série consacrée à l'exploration et à la valorisation des manuscrits médiévaux. Le livre est divisé en trois parties : la première est consacrée aux images...

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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, 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 score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.161 · 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