MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3132830006 · doi:10.1101/2021.02.10.20249093

The Milano Sforza Registers of the Dead: Health Policies in Italian Renaissance

2021· preprint· en· W3132830006 on OpenAlexaff
Elia Biganzoli, Ester Luconi, Patrizia Boracchi, Riccardo Nodari, Francesco Comandatore, Alfio Ferrara, Silvana Castaldi, F.I.M. Vaglienti, Cristiana Panella, Massimo Galli

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicYersinia bacterium, plague, ectoparasites research
Canadian institutionsTheMuseum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlague (disease)The RenaissanceHistoryInstitutionPolitical scienceHumanitiesGeographyEconomic historyGenealogyDemographyAncient historyArtSociologyLawArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The institution of the Liber Mortuorum in Milan greatly anticipates death registrations in Europe. Introduced in 1450 by Duke Francesco Sforza for the early containment of plague it was daily compiled until 1801, reporting demographical data and causes of death, leaving a corpus of 366 volumes, an outstanding source for interdisciplinary research. Addressed to ascertain individual causes of death, it represents an unprecedented early example of disease monitoring and prevention. The paper discusses Sforza’s health policy in Milan, describes the Mortuorum registres features at the end of the 15 th century, and analyzes the distribution of the city deaths in 1480, a year without epidemic events. These data constituted the first entry of a database of the Liber Mortuorum .

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicYersinia bacterium, plague, ectoparasites researchFrench-language works237,207