MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280652993 · doi:10.1017/s000358152100038x

PARCHMENT, PRINT AND PAINT: THE DISSEMINATION OF THE CECIL GENEALOGY

2022· article· en· W4280652993 on OpenAlexaff
Richard J. Moll

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Antiquaries Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeraldryGenealogyHobbyHistoryLegitimacyArt historyClassicsLawArtVisual artsPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

William Cecil’s interests in heraldry and genealogy, and his particular concern for the antiquity of his own pedigree, are well known, but it is often presented as a personal hobby. This paper explores the means by which William Cecil used printed heraldic treatises, kings of arms and even domestic decoration to make his private genealogical research public. Rather than using genealogical study as a refuge from the world, Cecil actively used print, the office of arms and architecture to publicise his pedigree far more widely than other new men who sought the legitimacy of antiquity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.021
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.200 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Antiquaries JournalSame topicHistorical Art and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207