In Praise of Fragments: A Manuscript of the Prose Tristan in Châlons-en-Champagne
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The work today known as the prose Tristan, whose earliest version was composed c. 1220-1235, was one of the most widely disseminated literary texts in French of the later Middle Ages. Of the 80-plus medieval manuscripts that have come down to us, however, only ten volumes or sets of volumes can be considered “complete” insofar as they tell a more or less uninterrupted tale from prologue to epilogue. Most of the surviving manuscripts, though materially intact, provide only one or two sections of this vast text, or else a selection of choice episodes. And approximately one quarter of the manuscripts listed in the most up-to-date inventories of Tristan manuscripts are fragments. To use the words of A. C. Dionisotti, these fragments were “made rather than born” thus: they were physically detached from more complete volumes some time after their production, sometimes by accident or through wear and tear, but more often than not because later users prized the durability of parchment over the text written upon it when it came to binding their printed books or even lining their hats.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".