Bibliographic record
Abstract
U prilogu »O akademiji Miha Sorkočevića«, koji je objavljen prije 18 godina, R. Maixner je držao da je ta dubrovačka akademija bila arkadijskog tipa1 pa je nasuprot takvu njezinu usmjerenju isticao stav talijanskog prosvjetitelja Alberta Fortisa (1741— 1803), intimnog prijatelja dubrovačkog erudita Miha Sorkočevića-Sorgo (1739—-1796). Fortis je »imao strože nazore o ulozi akademije, u kojoj je gledao u prvom redu znanstvenu ustanovu praktičnog zna- čaja«. Tom je prilikom Maixner upozorio na Fortisovu knjigu Mineralogische Reisen durch Calabrien und Apulien,23 koja je, prema tadašnjem običaju, bila napisana u epistolarnom obliku: autor apo- strofira svog mladog dubrovačkog prijatelja i istomišljenika Tomu Basiljevića (1756—1806), inače nećaka Miha Sorkočevića (Tomina majka Kata bila je Mihina sestra) i kasnijeg člana njegove efemerne akademije koji je, spomenimo usputno, bio najvažniji član dubro- vačke prosvjetiteljske elite po svom definitivnom povratku u do- movinu nakon preko deset godina provedenih na Zapadu (Italija, Švicarska, Njemačka, Austrija), što iz studijskih a što iz obiteljskih razloga.“ Ta je knjiga izašla 1788. god., u Weimaru.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.003 |
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.
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".