MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885262104 · doi:10.1553/joeb65s1

Der Brief des Paulos Helladikos (CPG 7531). Autor, Datierung und Kontext

2016· article· de· W2885262104 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christoph Begass

Bibliographic record

VenueJahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik · 2016
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalestineScholarshipQuarter (Canadian coin)Section (typography)HistoryPhilosophyClassicsArtAncient historyPolitical scienceArchaeologyComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article examines the letter of Paulos Helladikos (CPG 7531) on monastic failures, which was widely ignored by scholarship though edited by V. Lundström in 1902. In a first section it can be shown that the letter´s author, Paulos Helladikos, is to be identified with Paul of Elousa. Due to parallel passages in the Lives of the Monks of Palestine by Cyril of Scythopolis the letter can be dated in the years 530/31-554. Thus, Paul´s lifetime can be fixed around the second quarter of the sixth century A.D.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.003

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.224 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJahrbuch der Österreichischen ByzantinistikSame topicArchaeology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207