Kodikologie und Paläographie im digitalen Zeitalter 2 / Codicology and Palaeography in the Digital Age 2, eds. Franz Fischer, Christiane Fritze, and Georg Vogeler, in collaboration with Berhard Assmann, Malte Rehbein, and Patrick Sahle, Schriften des Instituts für Dokumentologie und Editorik 3, Norderstedt: Books on Demand, 2010. (ISBN 978-3-8423-5032-8, €58 at bookstores, electronic version [pdf] free at http://kups.ub.uni-koeln.de/4337/)
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
Readers of DM will not need reminding that, in recent years, we have seen impressive digitisation enterprises focusing on manuscripts, featuring mass-digitisation approaches (e.g. the manuscripts of the Diocesan and Cathedral Library in Cologne, http://www.ceec.uni-koeln.de/), digital editions (e.g. Codex Sinaiticus, http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/); and the application of cutting-edge technologies to recover unreadable text and investigate material aspects (e.g. the Archimedes Palimpsest Project, http://archimedespalimpsest.org/). Such enterprises have generated a great deal of public and scholarly interest, and it should certainly not be seen as a mere coincidence that research into the history, materials, and texts of Ancient and Mediaeval manuscripts are currently experiencing a revival as well, given the increased accessibility of manuscripts via their digital surrogates and the new possibilities opened up by the aforementioned digitisation enterprises. Recent manuscript studies, particularly when informed by digital approaches, seem to make a good case for the widely held view among Digital Humanists that digitisation and digital research not only add to traditional approaches but also initiate a qualitative transformation of an entire field of research. Hence the first English sentence at the publisher’s website introducing the volume to be reviewed here: Digital technology changes the way scholars work with manuscripts (http://www.i-d-e.de/schriften/3-kpdz2).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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