<i>Between Orders and Heresy: Rethinking Medieval Religious Movements</i>, ed. Jennifer Kolpacoff Deane and Anne E. Lester. Toronto, Buffalo, and London: University of Toronto Press, 2022, xx, 409 pp., 7 b/w ill.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many times, recent scholars tend to approach their topics as if they were ex ovo. In reality, medieval research in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries has carried out profound, far-reaching, and often seminal scholarship, often in German, French, or Spanish, which Anglophone researchers tend to ignore, often simply because they have no longer the command of any of those languages, not even to speak of Latin as the basic language of their sources. The present volume constitutes a very pleasant exception to the rule, at least as regards to the respect for older research, such as the work done by Herbert Grundmann (1902–1970) who had laid the foundation for much of current religious history in the Middle Ages, examining it particularly from the perspective of minority groups such as the beguines, heretics, and mystics.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".