MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W411511607

In the Middle Ages

2014· book· en· W411511607 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard Newhauser

Bibliographic record

VenueBloomsbury Academic eBooks · 2014
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiddle AgesLiturgySilenceArt historySoulArtPerformance studiesFaithSociologyHistoryMedia studiesTheologyAnthropologyAestheticsPhilosophyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The Sensual Middle Ages Richard Newhauser (Arizona State University, USA) 1. The Social Life of the Senses: Experiencing the Self, Others, and Environments Chris Woolgar (University of Southampton, UK) 2. Urban Sensations: The Medieval City Imagined Kathryn Reyerson (University of Minnesota, USA) 3. The Senses in the Marketplace: Markets, Shops, and Shopping in Medieval Towns Martha Carlin (University of Wisconsin, USA) 4. The Senses in Religion: Liturgy, Devotion, and Deprivation Beatrice Caseau (University of Paris-Sorbonne (Paris IV), France) 5. The Senses in Philosophy and Science: Mechanics of the Body or Activity of the Soul? Pekka Karkkainen (University of Helsinki, Finland) 6. Medicine and the Senses: Feeling the Pulse, Smelling the Plague, and Listening for the Cure Faith Wallis (McGill University, Canada) 7. The Senses in Literature: The Textures of Perception Vincent Gillespie (University of Oxford, UK) 8. Art and the Senses: Art and Liturgy in the Middle Ages Eric Palazzo (University of Poitiers, France) 9. Sensory Media: From Sounds to Silence, Sight to Insight Hildegard Elisabeth Keller (Indiana University, USA and University of Zurich, Switzerland) Notes Bibliography Notes on contributors Index

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)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.009

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.231
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloomsbury Academic eBooksSame topicMedieval Literature and HistoryFrench-language works237,207