Bibliographic record
Abstract
SEMINARIUM PHILOLOGIAE HUMANISTICAEHumanistica Lovaniensia.Journal of Neo-Latin Studies (ISSN 2593-3019) is a KU Leuven based double-blind peer-reviewed international journal that appears twice a year at humanistica.be.It welcomes articles in English, French, German, Italian and Spanish on Neo-Latin language, literature and culture, as well as critical editions and translations of Neo-Latin texts.Volumes 1 through 16 (1928-1961) were edited by Henry de Vocht as a series of monographs on the history of Humanism in Leuven.Starting with volume 17 (1968) Humanistica Lovaniensia appeared annually as a Journal of Neo-Latin Studies.After a half-century of annually printed editions, first under the pioneering editorship of Jozef IJsewijn , then under his successors Gilbert Tournoy (1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008) and Dirk Sacré (2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014)(2015)(2016)(2017), became an online-only open access publication under the editorship of Jeroen De Keyser (2017Keyser ( -2019)).This policy was continued by the current editors Dirk Sacré and Toon Van Houdt (
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.852 | 0.702 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".