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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Though the issue of identity in the early Middle Ages has attracted considerable attention, the identification of persons deserves some, for identification is a matter of both social and state importance. While both the Greek and Islamic worlds had more advanced techniques for identifying and accrediting persons, the Franks, early and late, held fast to name, place, and function. And while the early Franks had problems with imposture and identification, the late Franks seem to have had few, which remains something of a mystery. The issue of identification is approached here through an examination of different kinds of persons: reputational (in the major annals), parchment (in polyptyques), and displaced (as in Einhard's lists of the miraculously cured). A series of questions arise. Why, for instance, did physical appearance play so small a part in identification in the Frankish world? And how did western travellers respond to other identification practices when they left Europe? Not all of the many questions concerning identification can at present be answered, but we need to make a start.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it