<i>The Typography of Syriac: A Historical Catalogue of Printing Types, 1537-1958</i>, by J.F. Coakley
Bibliographic record
Abstract
architect's duties (328), bathing activities (190), and Pliny's work ethics (145-47).Moreover, despite the abundance of high-quality images, many of them seem unconnected to the text: the famous inscription preserving Augustus's posthumous account of his accomplishments (not his will, as the caption reads, I72) is illustrated without further comment (17o-71); the map known as the Tabula• Peutingeriana is shown as proof for the extent of Rome's eastern empire (94-95); and a wall painting from the Boscoreale villa is used to illustrate a theatrical set (41).Most surprising of all is the author's own observation: "If one were to comb through ancient literature to find references to writers' book collections and libraries and collate them logically, making rational deductions from the information available, one would conclude that nearly all writers and men of letters -and others too -possessed some kind of library, large or small" (200).If this were truly the aim of this study, the results, ironically, fall far short of their mark.In the end, it might be hoped that a reader who encounters this book will become sufficiently interested in the topic to seek out other more successful (and accessible) studies.3
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.018 |
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".