MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317828531 · doi:10.12681/eul.32694

Ψήγματα κριτικής

2000· article· el· W4317828531 on OpenAlexaff
David Jordan

Bibliographic record

VenueEULIMENE · 2000
Typearticle
Languageel
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicByzantine Studies and History
Canadian institutionsRéseau Québécois en Innovation Sociale
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColumn (typography)LinguisticsPhilosophyMathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

α. Αt PGM XXXV 26 read τῷ φοροῦντι τὸ χαριτήσην (for χαριτήσιον) τοῦ<το>, β. In the left-hand column of 31-40 read πάντα τὰ πνεύματα τῆς κοσμή/σεος <καὶ?> εύκρα/σίας· ἐπικαλοῦμαι καὶ παρακαλῶ καὶ ἐξορκίζω/ ὑμᾶς, ἵνα μου ὑ/πακούσητε κ(αὶ) ἀπαραβάτους χά/[ριν δότ]ε τῷ φοροῦτι τὸ/ [χ]αριτ̣ί̣σην μο̣υ̣ τ̣ο̣ῦ̣το. Αt PGM Ο 1.4 and 1.10 read not λαλήσεν (for λαλήσειν) but λαλῆσε{ν} (for λαλῆσαι{ν}). Behind a puzzling phrase in DTAud 155-70 (Rome, IV-V A.D.) there probably stood the words: ὑμεῖς δέ, ἐφυδριάδες νύμφαι, ἀϊδώνται, ἔγχωροι κατοικοῦσαι.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1700.094

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations2
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEULIMENESame topicByzantine Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207