MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Syrische Astrologie und das syrische Medizinbuch by Stefanie Rudolf

2021· article· en· W3212149566 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Émilie Villey

Bibliographic record

VenueAestimatio Sources and Studies in the History of Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLicenseEncyclopediaLibrary sciencePhilosophyClassicsPolitical scienceArtComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In her book entitled Syrische Astrologie und das syrische Medizinbuch, Stefanie Rudolf tackles a Syriac encyclopaedia known as the Book of Medicines, which was edited and translated into English for the first time by William Budge in 1913. Budge’s edition was based on a reading of the manuscript BL 9360, which was, in Budge’s estimation, copied in 1894 in the city of Alqosh from a 12th-century manuscript. Reviewed by: Émilie Villey, Published Online (2021-08-31)Copyright © 2021 by Émilie VilleyThis open access publication is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (CC BY-NC-ND) Article PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/aestimatio/article/view/37727/28729 Corresponding Author: Émilie Villey,CNRS ParisE-Mail: emilie.villey@cnrs.fr

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 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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.012
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAestimatio Sources and Studies in the History of ScienceSame topicHistorical, Religious, and Philosophical StudiesFrench-language works237,207