MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Philosophical <i>Entente</i> of Particulars:

2012· article· en· W217540236 on OpenAlexaff
Jelena Marelj

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Chaucer Review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNominalismProblem of universalsAllegiancePhilosophyEpistemologyMetaphysicsPoetryLiteratureLinguisticsArtLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

That the philosophical tenets of scholastic nominalism underwrite Chaucer’s poetry has been firmly established in Chaucer studies, yet whether Chaucer’s allegiance on the question of universals lies with realist or nominalist epistemology—or with neither—still remains a point of critical contention.1 This philosophical problem of universals structures the conflicts of Chaucer’s eponymous heroes in Troilus and Criseyde, who oscillate between

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.034
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Chaucer ReviewSame topicMedieval Literature and HistoryFrench-language works237,207