MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317743789 · doi:10.14315/arg-2004-0102

Specific or Generic “Gentile Tale”? Sources on the Breslau Host Desecration (1453) Reconsidered

2004· article· de· W2317743789 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

VenueArchiv für Reformationsgeschichte - Archive for Reformation History · 2004
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval European History and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Der vorliegende Beitrag analysiert die Funktion von Erzählungen über Hostienschändungen in der spätmittelalterlichen Gesellschaft. Untersucht werden drei Quellengruppen (Lieder, Exempla und „historische“ Erzählungen), die über die Breslauer Hostienschändung von 1453 berichten. Die Darstellungen werden miteinander verglichen und in den Kontext ihres literarischen Genres, ihrer Herkunft und ihrer Funktion gestellt. Die Erzählungen über die Hostienschändung können als typisches Beispiel einer „gentile tale“ (Miri Rubin) gelten: eine Geschichte, die von Christen för Christen erzählt wurde und eine spezifische Funktion in der christlichen Gesellschaft hatte. Die Funktion der hier untersuchten Erzählungen ist im Kontext der Devotio Moderna in den Niederlanden und in Deutschland zu suchen.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.174 · 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