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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When working in the 1980s on elucidating the cosmological views current in Ireland during the seventh century, I came to question the prevailing assumption that Isidorian works such as the Etymologiae and De natura rerum were available in Ireland already ca. 650. It had become clear to me that whereas Hiberno-Latin texts of the third quarter of the seventh century shared much technical terminology with those two Isidorian treatises, the Irish authors did not understand the meaning of these words. Hiberno- Latin texts assigned to the mid-years of the seventh century had been adduced as evidence for early borrowings from Isidore of Seville (d. 636). Variations on statements such as '… We can now be almost completely confident that the writings of Isidore were known in Ireland in the 650s. In the case of the Etymologies, it is at least possible that that work reached Ireland before the middle of the seventh century' were commonplace in the field. This conviction led to the assignation of Hiberno-Latin texts to specific periods of the seventh century. Thus, for example, Aidan Breen concluded from his demonstration that the Commentarius in Epistolas Catholicas Scotti Anonymi was not influenced by the Etymologiae – contrary to previous belief – that 'since the text, however, emanated from that very scholastic environment to which the works of Isidore were first introduced in Ireland, a date of 660 seems highly unlikely. In all probability, the text predates 650'. Luned Mair Davies gave a very clear and concise account of the state of the question in the mid-nineties in her paper on Isidorian texts and the Canones Hibernenses, but readers may not think to seek this information in the study of a text generally dated to c. AD 700 or later.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.284 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it