Greti Dinkova-Bruun, <i>Catalogus Translationum et Commentariorum: Mediaeval and Renaissance Latin Translations and Commentaries, Volume XII</i>. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2022, 559 pp.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The twelfth volume of Catalogus Translationum et Commentariorum (CTC) marks a departure from earlier books in this series by focusing on the reception history of a single text: the Metamorphoses of Publius Ovidius Naso, otherwise known as Ovid. This book has been decades in the making. It began in the late 1970s, when Virginia Brown, then a member of the editorial board of CTC, commissioned Frank T. Coulson to compose an article on the medieval reception of Ovid’s most famous poem and the late Harry Louis Levy (1906–1981) to contribute information on the early modern commentaries. Coulson later collaborated with Harald Anderson to write the essay on the fortuna of the Metamorphoses and the sections on its commentary tradition and translation history. The result of the industry of these three scholars is well worth the wait. This massive instrument of reference is a monumental contribution to our understanding of the reception of Ovid’s poem in the medieval and early modern periods and the most important addition to Ovidian reception studies in modern scholarship. Exhaustive in its thoroughness and immaculate in its presentation, this book will enlighten and inform scholars and students of the Metamorphoses for decades to come.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.025 |
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".