Bibliographic record
Abstract
The TORONTO MEDIEVAL LATIN TEXTS series is published for the Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto, by the Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies.The series is intended primarily to provide editions suitable for university courses and curricula, at a price within the range of most students' resources.Many Medieval Latin texts are available only in expensive scholarly editions equipped with full textual apparatus but with little or no annotation for the student; even more are out of print, available only in libraries; many interesting texts still remain unedited.Editions in this series are usually based on one manuscript only, with a minimum of textual apparatus; emendations are normally made only where the text fails to make sense, not in order to restore the author's original version.Editors are required to select their manuscript with great care, choosing one that reflects a textual tradition as little removed from the original as possible, or one that is important for some other reason (such as a local variant of a text, or a widely influential version).Manuscript orthography and syntax are carefully preserved.The Editorial Board is not merely supervisory: it is responsible for reviewing all proposals, for examining all specimens of editors' work, and for the final reading of all editions submitted for publication; it decides on all matters of editorial policy.All of the volumes in the series are printed by photo-offset lithography, from camera-ready copy prepared at the Centre for Medieval Studies, using its computer and printing resources.As General Editor, I would like to thank the Centre for Medieval Studies and its Directors, past and present, for their continuing support and encouragement at all stages in the development of the series.This volume, the thirtieth in the series, is marked by two departures: first, of Anna Burko, who joined the TMLT in 1974.We are greatly indebted to her for her care and precision, her
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.378 | 0.219 |
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".