MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207942776 · doi:10.1111/rest.12781

Pius II and the Andreis (1462): Textual Circulation, Crusade Promotion and Papal Power

2021· article· en· W3207942776 on OpenAlex
Barry Torch, Jennifer Mara DeSilva

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicByzantine Studies and History
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopularityElitePower (physics)HistoryReputationCirculation (fluid dynamics)Promotion (chess)Presentation (obstetrics)ClassicsLiteraturePoliticsArtLawPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article investigates the Andreis , an account of the 1462 Roman adventus of St Andrew’s head relic. While the text is most commonly known from Book VIII of Pope Pius II’s Commentaries (1462‐64), it appeared in discrete parts and circulated independently from 1462. The Andreis is revealed as a compilation of texts by several authors, undermining Pius’ traditional role as the sole author of the Andreis and later Commentaries . Additionally, the Andreis is identified as an early festival book, with similar norms of circulation, impact, and elite presentation. Recreating the adventus through texts written for the event, the Andreis reflects contemporary expectations for festival books, while also encouraging support for an Ottoman crusade. Thus, circulating separately and later as part of the Commentaries , the Andreis contributed to Pius’ crusade campaign and reputation, arguing for the pope’s authority as Peter’s heir, his popularity as a leader, and his rightful role as the protector of Eastern Christians.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.207 · 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