MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2285689320 · doi:10.4000/ifha.1090

STEINER, Hannes, Ratpert St. Galler Klostergeschichten (Casus sancti Galli)

2013· article· fr· W2285689320 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Brousseau

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Institut français d’histoire en Allemagne · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Religious Studies of Rome
Canadian institutionsInstitut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les Casus Sancti Galli constituent une source importante pour l'histoire du IXe s. ; il s'agit en effet d'un des premiers exemples de Gesta abbatium, un genre appelé à se développer un peu plus tard, aux Xe et XIe s.Attribuée au moine de Saint-Gall Ratpert ( † ~911), cette œuvre est connue dans les manuscrits, dont le plus ancien conservé est probablement contemporain de l'auteur, sous le titre « Textus de origine et diversis casibus monasterii sancti Galli ».C'est à Ildefons von Arx ( † 1833), moine et archiviste du monastère, que l'on doit la première édition scientifique des Casus, parue en 1829 dans la série des Scriptores des Monumenta Germaniae Historica.Gerold Meyer von Knonau ( † 1931) en donna une nouvelle édition doublée d'un commentaire historique et publiée en 1972 dans les Mittheilungen zur vaterländischen Geschichte ; son accès difficile eut néanmoins raison de son succès, les historiens préférant plutôt se tourner vers la plus commode édition des MGH.Le temps était donc venu de rééditer ce texte, d'en fournir une traduction et un commentaire.C'est à cette tâche que s'attaqua H.S. en 1997 pour le compte des MGH.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de l’Institut français d’histoire en AllemagneSame topicHistorical and Religious Studies of RomeFrench-language works237,207