Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it