MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079825404 · doi:10.1515/byzs.2006.631

Relics and the Great Church

2006· article· en· W2079825404 on OpenAlexaff
John Wortley

Bibliographic record

VenueByzantinische Zeitschrift · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicByzantine Studies and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApostlesAltarEmperorAncient historyArtHistoryClassicsArchaeologyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Until its despoliation by the warriors of the Fourth Crusade in 1204, the relic-collection of Constantinople was the largest and most illustrious of relic-collections in Christendom. “Collection” is not an altogether appropriate word however, for the relics were unevenly distributed among the various shrines of the city. First among these stood the so-called “Lighthouse” church [του Φάϱου] of the Theotokos within the Great Palace, probably founded by the iconoclast emperor Constantine V Kopronymos. This was the imperial relic-collection par excellence, housing such outstanding relics as the Sacred Mandylion from Edessa, the Wood of the True Cross (most of the time) and many other famous relics. The principal churches of the city also had their relics: remains of the “Apostles” Andrew, Timothy and Luke lay beneath the altar of Holy Apostles' Church, the body of John Chrysostom to one side of it. Chalkoprateia housed the girdle [ζώνη] of the Theotokos, Blachernae her shawl [μαфóϱιον] – the list goes on and on. Indeed the impression is given that every significant church, including certain monastic foundations, possessed one or more relic(s).

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueByzantinische ZeitschriftSame topicByzantine Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207