MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399032148 · doi:10.16995/dm.11677

Teaching Digital Byzantine Sigillography: First Experiences and Future Strategies

2024· article· en· W4399032148 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Medievalist · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntellectual Property Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper delves into the preliminary results and future initiatives concerning the pedagogical aspects of two funded projects, DigiByzSeal (supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and the Agence Nationale de la Recherche) and DiBS (funded by the VolkswagenStiftung), which jointly aim to advance the field of Byzantine Sigillography. One of the objectives of these projects that stands out most prominently is the establishment of a sustainable, research-based, digital teaching infrastructure, along with the introduction of innovative pedagogical methods. In this paper, we specifically scrutinize two distinct teaching formats: (1) SigiDoc training weeks, designed to equip experts in Byzantine Sigillography with proficiency in XML and data modelling, and (2) an international seminar centred around the creation of a permanent digital exhibition addressing various facets of Byzantine society through the lens of seals. These instructional approaches present both organizational and conceptual complexities. However, the overarching aim in both cases is to optimize data reuse for sustainability, accessibility, and informed utilization. Furthermore, this paper touches upon the implementation of collaborative digital strategies pertaining to Byzantine artefacts containing textual elements. It underscores the cultivation of interdisciplinary exchanges with the field of Digital Humanities and the integration of globally shared pedagogical concepts within Byzantine Sigillography and Byzantine Studies at large.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital MedievalistSame topicIntellectual Property LawFrench-language works237,207