Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medieval Western Christians could recognize hermits. A reader admiring the image of the heavenly ladder in the encyclopedic Hortus deliciarum of Herrad of Landsberg (d. 1195) could easily identify the bearded, barefoot, bare-shinned, rough-clad figure reaching for the “crown of life” ahead of the recluse, the monk, and the clerk, but who, alas, is losing his footing as he glances back at his garden. His high place is no accident. Peter Damian (d. 1072/3) describes the eremitical life as the “golden road … the high road, preeminent among others leading to higher things.” Yet scholars today do not find hermit-spotting similarly easy, and they debate what solitude is, how hermits relate to monastic rules, and where to classify temporary hermits and members of semi-eremitical religious orders. In the present study, hermits are defined as people who, for the sake of prayer, live an isolated existence in “wilderness” outside the outer court of a monastery or the bounds of a churchyard.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".