MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

De Vetula: a Medieval Manuscript Containing Probability Calculations

2000· article· en· W2120137878 on OpenAlexaff
David R. Bellhouse

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Statistical Review · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicProbability and Statistical Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDicePoetrySection (typography)Calculus (dental)MathematicsHistoryClassicsArtComputer scienceLiteratureStatisticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary De Vetula , a poem that contains probability calculations on the throw of three dice, was written in the mid‐thirteenth century. The poem was widely circulated, read and quoted. There is strong evidence that some of the medieval readers clearly understood how the probability calculations were obtained. Based on the discussion given here, it is put forward that an elementary probability calculus was established and known in Europe from about the year 1250. A translation of the relevant section of the poem is given.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.009

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations23
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Statistical ReviewSame topicProbability and Statistical ResearchFrench-language works237,207