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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MS Douce d.6 in the Bodleian Library, Oxford (SC 21983), is well known on account of its inclusion of two Tristan poems, namely, the romance by Thomas (ff. 1r-12v) and the episode associated with it, the Folie Tristan (ff. 12vb-19ra). It is all the more surprising, therefore, that the complete contents of the manuscript, which comprises twentytwo vellum folios, have scarcely ever been described by editors of the Tristan poems, including even Joseph Bédier. The honourable exception remains the admirable and indefatigable Francisque Michel, in his three-volume study of the early Tristan poems published in London and Paris over 180 years ago, wherehe printed the opening and concluding lines of the two texts that we edit below. The MS contains five texts in all: Thomas’s Tristan, the Folie Tristan, and the debate between Humility and Pride (ff. 19ra-20ra) — all written by the same scribe soon after the middle of the thirteenth century. The prose version of the legend of the Holy Rood, or “Seth” (ff. 20v-21v), was added by another hand later, probably in the last quarter of the century. Finally (ff. 21v-22r), and in the same hand, there is a Latin prose passage on the composition of the Holy Rood, beginning “Crux Christi conficiebatur ex quatuor lignis” and concluding “unde versus: Pes cedrus stipesque cipressus olivaque summum / Palmaque transversum retinet Christi crude lignum.”
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it