MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201725453 · doi:10.15829/2686-973x-2021-70

Beguines of Languedoc — “other” Beguines and the cult of their saints

2021· article· en· W3201725453 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yu. V. Rodionova

Bibliographic record

VenueRussian Journal of Church History · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyCultHistoriographyDoctrineQuarter (Canadian coin)TRACE (psycholinguistics)PopulationHistoryPhenomenonSociologyAncient historyLawPhilosophyPolitical scienceArchaeologyDemographyEpistemologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The religious movement of the Beguines in Languedoc in the first quarter of the XIV century is a unique phenomenon of the development of the ideology of spirituals — ideology that arose within Franciscanism. Using his example, it is possible to clearly trace how the ideology of educated intellectuals, who developed it and discussed it within their own order, passed to groups of representatives of the urban population. The new adherents of the teaching developed it within the framework of their idea of how a “classical” religious movement should be built — their own saints, martyrs, martyrologies and holy relics appeared. In Western historiography, in the presence of a large amount of collected material, the activities of individuals who have left written evidence of the development of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit are actively studied, however, there is no connection between how these ideas were practically introduced into the minds of people far from intellectual disputes and their development within urban population groups.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.179 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussian Journal of Church HistorySame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207