MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767482431 · doi:10.4000/ifha.8799

Michael Embach, Martina Wallner, Conspectus der Handschriften Hildegards von Bingen

2017· article· fr· W2767482431 on OpenAlexaff
Laurence Moulinier‐Brogi

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Institut français d’histoire en Allemagne · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Literary, and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanitiesArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Michael Embach, qui dirige actuellement la Stadtbibliothek et le Staatsarchiv de Trèves, s’est signalé depuis plus d’une dizaine d’années comme le grand spécialiste de la réception des œuvres de Hildegarde de Bingen (1098-1179) au Moyen Âge et à l’époque moderne. Depuis son habilitation intitulée Die Schriften Hildegards von Bingen. Studien zu ihrer Überlieferung und Rezeption im Mittelalter und in der frühen Neuzeit (Berlin, Akademie Verlag), il n’a cessé de contribuer à une meilleure conna...

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.008

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de l’Institut français d’histoire en AllemagneSame topicHistorical, Literary, and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207