MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2403620321 · doi:10.1080/02606755.2004.9522188

Printing-houses and printing in the service of the Polish Parliament in the sixteenth century

2004· article· en· W2403620321 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Janusz Małłek

Bibliographic record

VenueParliaments Estates and Representation · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Cultural Studies of Poland
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentQuarter (Canadian coin)HistoryClassicsGovernment (linguistics)EmpireWork (physics)Section (typography)Ancient historyArtLawPolitical sciencePoliticsArchaeologyEngineeringPhilosophyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY The date generally taken by historians to mark the beginning of the two-chamber parliament in Poland is 1493. This date coincided with the beginnings of printing in Poland, almost half a century later than in the Holy Roman Empire. However, another quarter century was to pass after the first printed materials appeared in Poland before this new technique of mass communication was applied to work in the Polish parliament. Based on literature to date (including a work by M. Cytowska, Bibliography of Government Publications in the Sixteenth Century (Wroclaw, 1961)) and his own research in the Polish historical documents section in the Stockholm archive, the author tries to show the ancillary function of printing-houses and printing in the work of the Polish parliament in the sixteenth century. He analyses printed materials: invitation forms to the seym, minutes of proceedings, tax bills and so on. The fact that parliamentary publications began to appear not only in Latin but also, from the mid-sixteenth century, in Polish, deserves attention.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueParliaments Estates and RepresentationSame topicHistorical and Cultural Studies of PolandFrench-language works237,207