MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376543479 · doi:10.1353/mns.2023.0013

Commedia: A Digital Edition ed. by Prue Shaw

2023· article· en· W4376543479 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth Coggeshall

Bibliographic record

VenueManuscript studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRenaissance and Early Modern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryRavennaLibrary scienceArt historyHistoryArtLiteratureWorld Wide WebComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Commedia: A Digital Editioned. by Prue Shaw Elizabeth Coggeshall Commedia: A Digital Edition, 2nded. Edited by Prue Shaw. Florence: Fondazione Ezio Franceschini; Saskatoon: Inkless Editions, 2021. https://www.dantecommedia.it. ISBN: 1-904628-21-4. T he year 2021 wasmomentous for Dante studies, marking, as it did, the seventh centenary of the poet's death. Universities, scholarly societies, museums, libraries, and other public-serving institutions commemorated the occasion with in-person and online talks and conferences, curated exhibits, performances, and other celebratory remembrances of the anniversary of Dante's death in Ravenna in September 1321. Among these commemorative exercises, one of the most noteworthy was the release of the second edition of Prue Shaw's digital Commedia, published by Inkless Editions (formerly Scholarly Digital Editions) and SISMEL. The CommediaProject, which uses computer analysis to analyze seven key [End Page 167]witnesses in the poem's early manuscript tradition, was originally published on DVD-ROM in 2010. Since then, it has proven to be one of the most valuable resources for the study of the poem's early transmission, even if access to it was limited. The revised edition of the project expands the reach of this rich resource: unlike its limited-access predecessor, the 2021 edition was published as an open-access, free website (https://www.dantecommedia.it/), featuring several new or expanded tools for research. Much like the DVD, the 2021 website presents an information-rich critical edition of the Commedia, with transcriptions of the so-called Sanguineti seven: Ash (Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, MS Ashburnham 828), Ham (Berlin, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preußischer Kulturbesitz, MS Hamilton 203), LauSC (Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, MS Plut. 26 sin. 1), Mart (Milan, Biblioteca Nazionale Braidense, Aldina AP XVI 25), Rb (Florence, Biblioteca Riccardiana, MS Ricc. 1005; and Milan, Biblioteca Nazionale Braidense, MS AG XII 2), Triv (Milan, Biblioteca dell'Archivio Storico Civico e Trivulziana, MS Trivulziano 1080), and Urb (Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, MS Urb. lat. 366). These are seven complete manuscripts that Federico Sanguineti had identified to compile his 2001 critical edition, revising Giuseppe Petrocchi's 1966–67 Edizione nazionale, which had, until Sanguineti's revision, been nearly universally adopted as the standard edition of the Commedia. The CommediaProject team originally set out to test the validity of Sanguineti's stemma using computerized phylogenetic analysis. The results of that analysis are presented at length in the site's editorial material, which is largely reprinted from the original edition. Shaw's DVD-ROM edition has been much discussed, and its methods and conclusions debated (see, e.g., Giorgio Inglese, "Rev. of Dante Alighieri, Commedia. A Digital Edition, ed. Prue Shaw," Giornale storico della letteratura italiana189, no. 627 [2012]: 453–5; Vera Ribaudo, "Nuovi orizzonti dell'ecdotica? L'edizione elettronica della Monarchiae della Commediadi Prue Shaw," L'Alighieri42, no. 2 [2013]: 95–127; Paolo Trovato, Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Lachmann's Method[Libreriauniversitaria, 2014], 208–18; Elena Spadini, "Processing Dante's Commedia: From Sanguineti's Edition to Digital Tools," RIDE3 [2015]). As reviewers have noted, the 2010 edition has much to commend it, features that the revised edition retains or [End Page 168]enhances: meticulous transcriptions that render both text and editorial interventions exactly as they appear on the page; high-resolution images of manuscript folios (excepting MS Urb. lat. 366 of the Vatican Library, excluded at that time because of copyright restrictions but now fully visualizable on the revised site); accurate and thorough witness descriptions, including their paleographical and codicological features; clear, functional, and effective tools for collation; variant maps, wherein relationships between witnesses are graphed as "unrooted phylograms" representing proximity and divergence from one another; and the VBase tool, a proprietary software for complex variant analysis. Many of these features are more prominently displayed or more easily accessible on the revised site, such as the variant maps, which appear in thumbnail images alongside the collation, and VBase, now much more readily accessed through a single click on the static header (previously VBase was only accessible at the bottom of the long drop-down menu in the editorial material). Because much has been said of...

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManuscript studiesSame topicRenaissance and Early Modern StudiesFrench-language works237,207