Anmeldelser
Bibliographic record
Abstract
James Grier anmelder:John Bergsagel, ed. The Offices and Masses of St. Knud Lavard († 1131) (Kiel, Univ. Lib. Ms. S.H. 8 A.8°). 2 vols. Copenhagen: The Royal Library, 2010. Also published as Musicological Studies, 65/17. Ottawa: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 2010. Pp. vii, 145; xliv, 72. Peter Hauge anmelder:Arne Spohr, “How chances it they travel?” Englische Musiker in Dänemark und Norddeutschland 1579–1630 (‘Wolfenbütteler Arbeiten zur Barockforschung’, vol. 45; Harrassowitz Verlag: Wiesbaden 2009), 435 pp., illus., music exx. Bruno Svindborg anmelder:H.C. Andersens breve på nettet. Odense Bys Museer og H.C. Andersen Centret ved Syddansk Universitet, 2011. www.andersen.sdu.dk/brevbase/ Siegfried Oechsle anmelder:Niels W. Gade og hans europæiske kreds. En brevveksling 1836–1891/ Niels W. Gade und sein europäischer Kreis. Ein Briefwechsel 1836–1891. Udg. af / Hrsg. von Inger Sørensen. Udg. af Det Kongelige Bibliotek & Det Danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab / Hrsg. von der Königlichen Bibliothek & der Gesellschaft für Dänische Sprache und Literatur. I kommission hos / in Kommission bei Museum Tusculanum Press, 2008. Bind 1–3, i alt 1.668 ss. Ill. (Danish Humanist Texts and Studies, vol. 36). Svend Larsen anmelder:Esko Häkli: Innovation through Co-operation. The History of LIBER. Ligue des Bibliothèques Européennes de Recherche 1971–2009 2011, 371 s., indb. (Danish Humanist Texts and Studies, vol. 41).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.786 | 0.731 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".