Bibliographic record
Abstract
В начале 2000-х гг. в Италии были переизданы два ключевых труда русского филолога, мыслителя Владимира Николаевича Забугина: «Вергилий в итальянском Возрождении: от Данте до Торквато Тассо» и «История христианского Возрождения в Италии». Переиздание этих работ повлекло за собой новую волну интереса к наследию русского автора первой четверти XX в., жившего и работавшего в Италии. После долгих лет забвения труды Забугина о Вергилии, Помпонии Лете, Данте, истории итальянского Возрождения признаны классикой итальянской науки и переоценена его роль в герменевтическом обновлении истории искусств, главными героями которого были Аби Варбург и его школа. Об актуальной рецепции творчества Забугина в Италии пойдет речь в настоящей статье. In the early 2000s, two main works of the key Russian figure in the field of Italian Studies, philologist and thinker Vladimir Nikolaevich Zabugin «Virgil in the Italian Renaissance: from Dante to Torquato Tasso» and «The History of the Christian Renaissance in Italy» were republished in Italy. These editions provoked a new wave of interest to historical and philosophical heritage of the Russian author of the first quarter of the 20th century, who lived and worked in Italy. Previously neglected and forgotten Zabugin’s works on Virgil, Pomponius Lete, Dante, on the history of the Italian Renaissance were recognized as outstanding by leading historians, philologists, philosophers. Finally, his contribution to the hermeneutical turn of art history (whose main characters are considered Abi Warburg and his school) was also appreciated. The paper guides the reader through this current rediscovery and reception of Zabugin’s work in Italy with particular focus on his contribution to the field of renaissance studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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".