MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088097111 · doi:10.7202/1069593ar

Theodulf of Orléans and the Ark of the Covenant: A New Allegorical Interpretation at Germigny-des-Prés

2020· article· fr· W3088097111 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Gillian Mackie

Bibliographic record

VenueRACAR Revue d art canadienne · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’iconographie unique de la mosaïque de l’abside créée par Théodulf, évêque d’Orléans, à l’oratoire de Germigny-des-Prés en 806, contient le seul sujet hébreu et non chrétien à y avoir survécu sur un autel chrétien : une image de l’Arche d’Alliance, encadrée de deux chérubins, fidèle aux textes de l’Ancien Testament. L’image est analysée non seulement dans son sens littéral en tant qu’illustration historique d’un texte, mais aussi en rapport avec les nombreuses allégories de l’Arche qui firent l’objet de discussions exégétiques à l’époque. Des preuves sont fournies à l’effet que, parmi les multiples strates de sens coexistant sous la surface de cette image, pourrait exister une Vierge Marie trônant entre deux chérubins et que Théodulf, malgré l’absence d’éloges à la Vierge Marie dans ses propres textes, aurait pu inscrire – en vertu de son passé, de ses intérêts et de sa formation – cette allégorie cachée dans l’image non iconique qu’il avait érigée au-dessus de son autel. Ainsi, dans ses dévotions personnelles, pouvait-il saluer la Vierge en conformité avec sa position iconophobe et dans le respects êtres saints de sa foi.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.018
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRACAR Revue d art canadienneSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207