MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211123654 · doi:10.3138/seminar.58.1.4

Erkenntnis und Erleuchtung: Die Metaphern „Spiegel“ und „Licht“ bei David von Augsburg im Blickfeld von historischer Semantik und analogischer Bedeutungsbildung

2022· article· en· W4211123654 on OpenAlex
René Wetzel, Robert Gisselbaek

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminar A Journal of Germanic Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Literary, and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyArgument (complex analysis)ConceptualizationVernacularEpistemologyArtLiteratureCognitive scienceLinguisticsPsychologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we look at the metaphors of “mirror” and “light” in medieval vernacular literature to examine the influence of their semantics on the conceptualization of cognition. We argue that “mirror” and “light” are traditional means to express and to reflect cognitive processes. Speaking metaphorically is thus intimately related to understanding concepts in general but also allows the shaping as well as the transmission of concepts. In support of our argument, we will, in the second part of this paper, carefully consider David von Augsburg’s Spiegel der Tugend ( Mirror of Virtue), which blends the metaphors “mirror” and “light” conceptually.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.250 · 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