MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051024528 · doi:10.1163/156798911x546161

Giovanni Gioviano Pontano (1429–1503) on Astrology and Poetic Authority

2011· article· it· W2051024528 on OpenAlex
Matteo Soranzo

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

VenueAries · 2011
Typearticle
Languageit
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Linguistic Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyAstrologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract L'articolo esamina per quale ragione Giovanni Gioviano Pontano (1429–1503) ha spiegato in termini di causalità astrologica l'origine della sua autorità poetica, con lo scopo di illustrare un elemento di continuità tra Medioevo e Umanesimo. I testi presi in esame sono il poema Urania (scritto nel 1475–1494; stampato nel 1505), il dialogo Actius (scritto nel 1495–1499; stampato nel 1507), il commento al Centiloquio pseudotolemaico (scritto nel 1477; stampato nel 1512) e il trattato De Rebus Coelestibus (scritto nel 1475–1495; stampato nel 1512). Si sostiene che l'approccio astrologico all'autorità poetica di Pontano deriva dalla sua interpretazione del primo aforisma del Centiloquio, e che questa scelta era dettata dal tentativo di mettere in questione la teoria del furor poetico di Marsilio Ficino, le cui opere stavano diventando sempre più diffuse nel contesto della Napoli Aragonese alla fine del Quattrocento.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.210 · 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