La representació de l’arbre en l’Arbre de ciència de Ramon Llull
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The abundant use of graphic material in the work of Ramon Llull makes for a space where words and images intersect. The figure of the tree which Llull describes verbally in his Arbre de ciència (1295-1296) is a complex and special case of the application of a rhetorical device called «ekphrasis». Despite the fact that the author did not envisage the possibility of making a visual representation, in the work's later transmission attempts were made to provide graphic images with results which were unsatisfactory for many reasons, of which the most important was the fact that Llull conceived of his tree as multidimensional. KEYWORDS: Llull; tree; ekphrasis. RESUM: L’ús abundant de recursos gràfics en l’obra de Ramon Llull és un lloc de confluència de paraula i imatge. L’esquema arbori que Llull descriu verbalment al seu Arbre de ciència (1295-1296) és un cas complex i particular d’aplicació del recurs retòric anomenat «ècfrasi». Malgrat que originalment l’autor no va preveure la possibilitat de fer-ne una representació visual, en el procés de transmissió de l’obra hom va assajar en diverses ocasions de fer-ne una plasmació gràfica amb resultats decebedors per múltiples raons, la més important de les quals és que Llull va concebre un arbre multidimensional.PARAULES CLAUS: Llull; arbre; ècfrasi. RESUMEN: El uso abundante de recursos gráficos en la obra de Ramon Llull es un lugar de confluencia de palabra e imagen. El esquema arbóreo que Llull describe verbalment en su Arbre de ciència (1295-1296) es un caso complejo y particular de aplicación del recurso retórico llamado «écfrasis». A pesar de que originariamente el autor no previó la posibilidad de hacer una representación visual, en el proceso de transmisión de la obra se intentó en diverses ocasiones hacer una plasmación gràfica con resultados decepcionantes por múltiples razones, la más importante de las cuales es que Llull concibió un árbol multidimensional. PALABRAS CLAVES: Llull; árbol; écfrasis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".