MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174296957 · doi:10.5117/que2019.2.003.slei

Een nieuwe tekstgetuige van de Historie van Troyen van Jacob van Maerlant

2019· article· nl· W3174296957 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Remco Sleiderink

Bibliographic record

VenueQueeste · 2019
Typearticle
Languagenl
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLexicography and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWitnessFragment (logic)Quarter (Canadian coin)ClassicsArtHistoryPhilosophyLinguisticsArchaeologyComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary A hitherto unknown fragment of Jacob van Maerlant’s Historie van Troyen has been discovered in the binding of a composite volume of three post-incunables in the library of the Abbey of Berne in Heeswijk-Dinther, Netherlands. It is the nineteenth text witness of Maerlant’s text, which was already known as the most widely spread chivalric story in Middle Dutch, although only one complete manuscript has survived. This article offers a first edition of the tiny fragment (25 incomplete lines on each side) and discusses its variants in comparison with the complete manuscript and one other fragment with which it shows overlap. The new fragment seems to be the only known remnant of this manuscript, which probably had three columns per page (56 lines each). The form of the letters suggests that it dates from the first quarter of the fourteenth century, which makes it the third-oldest text witness of the Historie van Troyen. The linguistic characteristics of the verses suggest that this manuscript was written in the county of Flanders.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.003

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQueesteSame topicLexicography and Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207