MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386766503 · doi:10.26443/arc.v50i.846

The Oxford Handbook of the Merovingian World, edited by Bonnie Effros and Isabel Moreira

2022· article· en· W4386766503 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica Gauthier

Bibliographic record

VenueArc The Journal of the School of Religious Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and language evolution
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The careful reader may learn at least as much about our cultural world, the one from which The Oxford Handbook of the Merovingian World has sprung, as the historical world it examines.Scholarship has certainly moved away from Edward Gibbon's rather dim view of the Merovingians.This dynasty of the first Frankish kings, founded by Clovis, ruled the people and the land occupied by the cultural ancestors of France, Belgium, Germany, southern Luxembourg, and parts of Switzerland from the late fifth to the mid-eighth centuries.Editors Bonnie Effros and Isabel Moreira spotlight work that privileges material culture over historical sources, questioning previous assumptions and showing how what was previously understood by many as merely a transitional period of decline from Antiquity, began to be seen as worthy of study in its own right.The political and cultural interactions of the Merovingians are examined in detail, but this is not a history book in the classical sense.The juxtaposition of disciplines provided here may certainly create future opportunities for a closer marriage of evidence and interpretation.The first of the forty-six essays in this book is an introduction written by Effros and Moreira establishing their methodology.The remaining forty-five essays are grouped into eight thematic sections.Contributions of women are well-represented in both the authorship and subject matter.Issues important to many scholars today, including explorations of gender, identity, and power dynamics, as well as deconstruction and reinterpretation of historical accounts, are omnipresent.Scholarship from both the natural and social sciences stimulate interdisciplinary engagement.Individual chapters can be

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)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.013

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArc The Journal of the School of Religious StudiesSame topicLinguistics and language evolutionFrench-language works237,207