MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2204496237 · doi:10.18778/2084-140x.04.04

The Bohemian Redaction of the Evangelium Nicodemi in Medieval Slavic Vernaculars

2014· article· en· W2204496237 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudia Ceranea Journal of the Waldemar Ceran Research Centre for the History and Culture of the Mediterranean Area and South-East Europe · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and language evolution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedactionCzechSlavic languagesHistoryClassicsLiteratureArtPhilosophyLinguisticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Bohemian Redaction of the Evangelium Nicodemi is a hybrid form of the apocryphon, combining elements of Latin traditions A and B. It circulated in central and eastern Europe, and was used as a source for late medieval translations into Byelorussian, Czech, and possibly Polish. The Byelorussian translation closely follows the idiosyncratic Latin text preserved in Gdańsk, Biblioteka Polskiej Akademii Nauk MS Mar. F. 202. The Bohemian Redaction may have also been translated into Polish, but it has left only faint traces in Polish texts. The Czech translation was carried out independently of both Byelorussian and Polish versions; it expands the text on the basis of Latin A and duplicates certain episodes. The Bohemian Redaction continued to be printed in Slavic vernaculars until the end of the nineteenth century.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.207 · 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