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 OpenAlexaff
Thibaud Lanfranchi

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

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

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

Citations46
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte Romanistische AbteilungSame topicClassical Studies and Legal HistoryFrench-language works237,207