Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirandola (1469Mirandola ( -1533) ) and His Critique of Aristotle (1967), scholars have become increasingly aware of this significant yet puzzling figure of early modernity and his importance in redefining th e multifaceted complexity of what we call the Italian Renaissance. 1 Gianfrancesco Pico's unique approach to humanism, demonology, and skepticism has led scholars such as Gian Mario Cao, Armando Maggi, and Walter Stephens to write extensively about him and his impact on early modern thought. 2 Even Wouter J. Hanegraaff-one of today's leading scholars on the history of ideas in the early modern period-assigned a pivotal role to Gianfrancesco in his renovated grand narrative of Renaissance thought.3 Notwithstanding the increasing scholarly attention paid to Gianfrancesco Pico, much work still remains to be done in order to understand more fully the significance of his contributions to early modernity, especially if one looks beyond his influence on modern skepticism.In fact, Gianfrancesco's works deal with themes that are essential if we are to expand our historical narrative of the Italian Renaissance to include such topics as the role of astrology and witchcraft theory in early modern Europe, the spreading of the cult of "living saints" in Italian lands, the survival of medieval forms of devotion, the influence of Neoplatonism in mainstream humanist thought, and the philosophical and psychological enquiry into the imagination.Despite the importance of such topics in contemporary research, and notwithstanding Gianfrancesco's widely accessible bibliography, most of these questions remain unanswered and most
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.391 | 0.232 |
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".