Part I: Meditations and Memorials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This, the first segment of the issue, contains the most disparate collection of material. Two of the contributors, Carol Harvey and Gina Heinbockel-Bolik, responded to the invitation to write about a senior scholar influential in the individual decision to become a medievalist. Stephen Steele also looks at a well-known medievalist, with a fascinating glimpse at the way in which Gustave Cohen, émigré medievalist in America during the Second World War, appeared in Canada, fostering medieval drama in person and over the radio. Cohen’s willingness to bring the study of medieval theatre to the audience of Radio-Canada responds preemptively to John Osborne's thoughtful consideration of the record of medieval studies in Canada. Cohen foresaw Osborne’s plea that we all involve the general public in the study of our subject with a workshop or set of lectures, at the very least, each year. Similarly, Andrew Taylor responds to Marc Renaud's public musing that humanities scholars need to find the relevance of their work, and embrace it in terms of its utility to society, and also to get with the program as far as new technology is concerned. Taylor proposes firstly that we move beyond our immediate anguished lament that relevance cannot be quanitified and secondly that the relationship between medieval studies and the amelioration of society needs to be measured delicately and with subtlety. He suggests that we turn to our own strengths, and reconsider, for example, why the elegant and well-written A Distant Mirror by Barbara Tuchman remains one of the few medieval monographs read as a matter of course by members of the general public.
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 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) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".