MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210479282 · doi:10.4000/jtei.3816

Encoding the Ethiopic Miracles of Mary

2022· article· en· W4210479282 on OpenAlexaff
Dorothea Reule

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Text Encoding Initiative · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture analysis
Canadian institutionsAdidas (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiracleFraming (construction)StandardizationIdentifierEncoding (memory)LiteratureHistoryNarrativeComputer scienceArtPhilosophyArtificial intelligenceTheologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article will illustrate the challenges of digitizing of historical manuscript catalogues, taking as an example the widespread and complex work of the “Miracles of Mary.” This work is typically composed of framing texts and miracle texts proper, often accompanied by miniatures, and it circulates in collections of varying standardization. A flexible encoding system with different identifiers for textual units and art themes has been developed, answering the most common challenges of encoding the Ethiopic literary tradition, improving the cataloguing.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Text Encoding InitiativeSame topicAfrican history and culture analysisFrench-language works237,207