MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255117864 · doi:10.4000/ifha.7710

Peter Dinzelbacher, Warum weint der König ? Eine Kritik des mediävistischen Panritualismus

2013· article· de· W4255117864 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Lienhard

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Institut français d’histoire en Allemagne · 2013
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Literary, and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les Européens du Moyen Âge exprimaient leurs émotions de manière plus effusive que nous : cette constatation a inspiré aux historiens des analyses diverses, qu’il convient de rappeler brièvement pour bien saisir l’intérêt du petit livre – deux articles – proposé par P. Dinzelbacher. Ainsi, Aaron Gourevitch a conclu que les psychologies médiévales étaient radicalement étrangères à l’observateur moderne. Puis Gerd Althoff a considéré que les émotions médiévales, surtout celles des grands rappor...

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 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)0.000
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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.006

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.193 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de l’Institut français d’histoire en AllemagneSame topicHistorical, Literary, and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207