MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175348809 · doi:10.19283/iliesi.lph.v0i8.683

Ritrovati due esemplari della prima edizione della Nova dilucidatio di Kant (1755) che si riteneva perduta

2021· article· it· W3175348809 on OpenAlex
Hansmichael Hohenegger, Antonio Lamarra, Riccardo Pozzo

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCineca Institutional Research Information System (Tor Vergata University) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageit
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicKantian Philosophy and Modern Interpretations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesNova (rocket)Nova scotiaPhilosophyArtHistoryArchaeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While preparing the new critical edition of Kant’s Latin dissertations, two copies were found of the first edition of the Nova dilucidatio (1755), which had been considered as en- tirely lost since 1944. One copy is preserved at the Latvijas Universitātes Akadēmiskā Bibliotēka Riga in Riga, the other one at the Kongelige Bibliotek in Copenhagen. The Copenhagen copy is interleaved with handwritten notes by Johann Reinhold Grube, one of the opponents in the public discussion of Kant’s dissertation which took place on 27 September 1755. KeYWorDS: Kant; Nova dilucidatio; Critical Editions; Literary Genres; Theory of Judgment

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.184 · 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