MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964265214 · doi:10.1515/zrgr-2019-0004

Edicts and Decrees during the Republic: A Reappraisal

2019· article· en· W2964265214 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

VenueZeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte Romanistische Abteilung · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Studies and Legal History
Canadian institutionsCanadian Heritage
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsMagistratePerspective (graphical)HistoryOrder (exchange)Meaning (existential)LawLiteraturePolitical scienceArtPhilosophyVisual artsEpistemologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, edicts and decrees are examined from the perspective of their meaning and their relations. After a brief overview of the literature, this article aims at setting out the difference between edicts and decrees and its evolution during the Roman Republic, mainly focusing on Latin sources. As Praetors' edicts and decrees are rather wellknown, this article focuses on edicts and decrees by other magistrates and in literary sources. Edictum appears to be originally a kind of order, decided by the sole magistrate and linked to his coercitio , whereas decretum is a collective decision, linked to iurisdictio , made to settle a very precise circumstance. Both of those acts gradually lost their differences and were reused in a different manner during the Empire.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.217 · 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