Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Companion to Byzantine Science est un volume composé de 13 chapitres, d’une introduction de Stavros Lazaris, d’une conclusion d’Anne Tihon et de trois index (index général, index des manuscrits et index des noms modernes) réalisés par Antonio Ricciardetto. Onze des 13 chapitres sont consacrés à un domaine spécifique de la science byzantine (sur les sciences mathématiques, l’optique, la météorologie et la physique, l’astronomie et l’astrologie, la géographie, la zoologie, la botanique, la médecine et la pharmacologie, la médecine vétérinaire, l’art militaire et enfin les sciences occultes (divination, astrologie, alchimie). Les deux premiers chapitres (« ‘Inner’ and ‘Outer’ Knowledge : The Debate between Faith and Reason in Late Antiquity » d’Hervé Inglebert et « Science Teaching and Learning Methods in Byzantium » d’Immaculada Pérez Martín et Divna Manolova) constituent une sorte d’introduction à l’ensemble des sujets abordés dans le volume. L’éditeur réussit son pari en offrant ici un véritable guide utile pour faciliter l’accès aux textes grecs byzantins traitant de sciences mathématiques et naturelles.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.111 | 0.067 |
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".