MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972481531 · doi:10.1017/9781316827437.014

Medieval Latin Christendom

2019· book-chapter· en· W2972481531 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

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Linguistic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristianityVernacularLexicographyMedieval LatinRoman EmpireHebrewClassicsJudaismMiddle AgesHistoryCzechIslamEmpireAncient historyArtLiteraturePhilosophyLinguisticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The western Roman empire left a double cultural legacy: Christianity, of a kind which acknowledged the authority of the bishop of Rome, and Latin, the language of Roman Christianity. This chapter tells the story of lexicography in the lands where Roman Christianity was practised and the Latin language was read. These lands correspond roughly with modern western and central Europe, but the concept ‘Europe’ was not in general use until the very end of this period, and need not distract us here. The Islamic and Orthodox neighbours of Latin Christendom had their own lexicographical traditions, which are treated in Chapters 8, 11, and 12. Within Latin Christendom, Jews contributed to the lexicography of at least three vernacular languages (French, Italian, and Czech), and these contributions are documented here, but the learned Jewish tradition of Hebrew lexicography is treated separately in Chapter 9. The pagans on the edges of Christendom were illiterate, and became literate only as they became Christian.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.195 · 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