MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387516794 · doi:10.1093/ehr/cead157

<i>‘We are All Servants’: The Diversity of Service in Premodern Europe (1000–1700)</i>, ed. Isabelle Cochelin and Diane Wolfthal

2023· article· en· W4387516794 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Corinna Peres

Bibliographic record

VenueThe English Historical Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversity (politics)The RenaissanceHistoryService (business)SociologyAnthropologyArt historyClassicsEconomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Journal Article 'We Are All Servants': The Diversity of Service in Premodern Europe (1000–1700), ed. Isabelle Cochelin and Diane Wolfthal Get access 'We are All Servants': The Diversity of Service in Premodern Europe (1000–1700), ed. Isabelle Cochelin and Diane Wolfthal (Toronto, ON: Centre for Renaissance and Reformation Studies, 2022; pp. 632. €42.95). Corinna Peres Corinna Peres University of Vienna, Austria corinna.peres@univie.ac.at Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The English Historical Review, cead157, https://doi.org/10.1093/ehr/cead157 Published: 11 October 2023

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.177 · 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.

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe English Historical ReviewSame topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207