MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324874807 · doi:10.1093/ahr/119.3.958

Anne A. Latowsky. Emperor of the World: Charlemagne and the Construction of Imperial Authority, 800–1229.

2014· article· en· W2324874807 on OpenAlexaff
Courtney M. Booker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Historical Review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmperorBiographyExtant taxonHistoryClassicsArtLiteratureAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2001, Matthias M. Tischler published his monumental 1,800-page study of the textual transmission and reception of Einhard's vita of Charlemagne, Einharts “Vita Karoli”: Studien zur Entstehung, Überlieferung und Rezeption. Tischler's work focused chiefly on the many manuscript copies (134 extant with a complete text) of the diminutive courtier's great Suetonian-inflected biography, on its various codicological contexts and textual recensions, and only then on what this widespread diffusion across space and time implies about the text's myriad readers and copyists. In her superb new book Emperor of the World: Charlemagne and the Construction of Imperial Authority, 800–1229, Anne A. Latowsky takes as a point of departure her astute and important observation that, as popular as Einhard's work was in the medieval West, it was in fact a single episode within the biography that especially captured the attention of numerous authors between the tenth and thirteenth centuries. What Einhard...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Historical ReviewSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207