MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774582675 · doi:10.1515/apf-2017-0033

Catalogue des textes magiques coptes

2017· article· en· W2774582675 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchiv für Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChecklistSelection (genetic algorithm)LinguisticsMagical thinkingHistoryPsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhilosophyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article presents an up-to-date checklist of Coptic magical texts. It deals with methodological issues, such as the criteria used for the selection of the texts and their classification into three categories (certain, probable and possible magical texts), and with the main characteristics of the texts included in the corpus: their geographical and chronological distribution, language and dialects, materials and purposes, and how they compare to Greek magical texts. A list with all items follows, including the basic characteristics for each of them

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.259 · 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