MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969751580

The Right Marginal Notes on Glaídemain and Gúdemain in TCD MS 1337

2018· article· en· W2969751580 on OpenAlexaff
Kristen Mills

Bibliographic record

VenueStudia Celtica Fennica · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and language evolution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlossaryMargin (machine learning)Interpretation (philosophy)LiteratureBattlePhilosophyHistoryLinguisticsArtComputer scienceAncient history
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines marginal notes glossing two entries (glaidemain and gudemain) in a legal glossary in TCD MS 1337. The entries in the glossary and the glosses in the upper margin connect these terms to a range of natural and supernatural beings (wolves, women of the side, morrigna, infernal demons, demons of the air, scaldcrows, and foxes). The glosses in the right margin etymologize the lemmata as referring to the doubling of howls or voices. It is argued here that this may refer to the phenomenon of the echo; furthermore, it is proposed that this interpretation may relate to a recurring image in the Tain Bo Cualnge, wherein supernatural beings screech in reply to Cu Chulainn’s shouts or the sounds of battle. Finally, the association between echoes and the voices of demons in a pseudepigraphic text and the Vita Antonii is discussed briefly.

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)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudia Celtica FennicaSame topicLinguistics and language evolutionFrench-language works237,207