MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400042380 · doi:10.1484/m.ipm-eb.5.139666

Back Matter ("Bibliography of Eriugenian Studies, 2000-2014", "Notes on Contributors", "Index")

2014· paratext· en· W4400042380 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInstrumenta patristica et mediaevalia · 2014
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Studies and Legal History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)BibliographyHistoryComputer scienceLibrary scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unjustly ignored as a result of a thirteenth-century condemnation, the thought of Johannes Scottus Eriugena (ca. 810-877) has only been subject to critical study in the twentieth century. Now, with the completion of the critical edition of Eriugena’s masterwork - the Periphyseon - the time has come to explore what is arguably the most intriguing and vital theme in his work: creation and nature. In honor of Edouard Jeauneau - Institute Professor at the Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, University of Toronto and Honorary Research Director at the C.N.R.S. in Paris - to whom the field of Eriugenian studies is enormously indebted, this volume seeks to undertake a serious examination of the centrality of Eriugena’s thought within the Carolingian context, taking into account his Irish heritage, his absorption of Greek thought and his place in Carolingian culture; of Eriugena as a medieval thinker, both his intellectual influences and his impact on later medieval thinkers; and of Eriugena’s reception by modern philosophy, from considerations of philosophical idealism to technology.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.012

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.248 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstrumenta patristica et mediaevaliaSame topicClassical Studies and Legal HistoryFrench-language works237,207