GEMMS (Gateway to Early Modern Manuscript Sermons 1530–1715): Confronting the Challenges of Sermons Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay describes the first phase of the GEMMS project (2014–2019), the purpose of which is to increase access to early modern English manuscript sermons and sermon notes (1530–1715) by creating a freely accessible online bibliographic database of records for these materials. It reviews the need for this resource, the current state of its development, and the challenges and successes to date as well as proposed developments in its next phase. Résumé Cet article décrit la première phase du projet GEMMS (2014–2019), dont l’objectif est de faciliter l’accès à des manuscrits et notes des sermons en anglais moderne naissant (1530–1715) en créant une base de données bibliographique en ligne et en libre accès des archives de ces documents. Cet article examine le besoin de cette ressource, l’état actuel de son développement, les défis et réussites jusqu’à présent, ainsi que les développements proposés pour la prochaine phase du projet. Mots-clés: sermons; manuscrits; base de données bibliographique; notes de sermons; Renaissance
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 | 0.015 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.005 |
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".