Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This essay examines the human experience of aging in the distant past by investigating a group of aging men during the 14th century in an Italian city, Bergamo, using notarial "documents of practice" from that community. Studying the aging process and its effects on the lives of people in the medieval era has three-fold significance: it broadens our understanding of aging as a human construct and a human experience, challenges an antihistorical theory of aging, and reinforces the importance of studying the specific experiences of aging individuals in both the past and the present. DESIGN OF THE STUDY: A qualitative study. Methods of analysis include nominative linkage and an investigation of the physical effects of aging on an individual, as seen in the documents of 1 long-lived notary. RESULTS: Aging clerics and notaries in Bergamo took on positions of increasing authority in the church and related institutions in the last decades of their lives. IMPLICATIONS: The documented activities of a group of affluent men in 14th-century Bergamo suggest that although there was little recorded discussion of "old age" as a life stage in that community, for these men, aging was a real social process with both positive and negative impacts on their lives. Giving a human face to these aging men of the distant past models an approach to the study of the aging process that has relevance for both historians and gerontologists alike.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".