MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2489793503

Annotations to MS Reims, Bibliothèque Municipale 877: A Brief Commentary on the Hermetic Asclepius

2011· article· en· W2489793503 on OpenAlexaff
David Porreca

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassicsPhilosophyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides an edition of the marginal notes contained in a manuscript of the Asclepius attributed to Hermes Trismegistus. The majority of the notes are synonyms and alternate readings, but the lengthier ones show that the annotator belongs to a group of scholars interested in Neoplatonic philosophy during the mid-to-late twelfth century. The format and content of the notes demonstrate that they can be considered an integral part of a body of commentaries on the Hermetic Asclepius dating to the second half of the twelfth century, including the Glosae super Trismegistum.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.134 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHistorical, Religious, and Philosophical StudiesFrench-language works237,207