The role played by towns in parliamentary commissions in the kingdom of Sardinia in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role played by towns in the political and institutional life of the kingdom of Sardinia during the 1400s is a subject that has been long neglected by historiography. The growing and privileged status of the feudal class has tended to monopolize the attention of existing studies and research, thereby practically ignoring the reality of urban life. First published in the collection Acta Curiarum Regni Sardinie, (the Acts of Parliaments in the Kingdom of Sardinia) in particular, proved to be of fundamental importance in providing knowledge of the institutions that governed the administrative, political, economic and social life of towns, communities and ville under the direct control of the crown. Among others, the towns in question included the capital city of Cagliari and the fortified villa of Alghero. The introduction of parliaments as an institution in the kingdom of Sardinia provided a new occasion for dialogue between urban communities and royal authority. With the establishment of the first assembly, summoned by Pietro IV in 1355 in the Castello quarter of Cagliari, the state-controlled towns and the ville not living under feudal regimes were called upon to participate in the proceedings of a parliament forming their own so called braccio (arm).
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".