MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400981826 · doi:10.1484/m.pjml-eb.5.140159

Back matter (“Michael W. Herren: Bibliography, 1963–2006”, “Index I: Manuscripts”, “Index II: Authors, People, Places, and Texts”)

2006· paratext· en· W4400981826 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePublications of the journal of Medieval Latin · 2006
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSoviet and Russian History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)BibliographyArtHistoryArt historyLibrary scienceComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some thirty years ago Michael Herren burst on the medieval Latin scene with his edition and translation of the notoriously difficult Hisperica Famina, and followed this a few years later with his translation of the prose works of Aldhelm. Notice was given that a junior scholar, unafraid to tackle some of the most obscure, complex, and arcane Latin, wished to make it accessible to non-Latinists as well as to those Latinists who lacked his particular skills. Not content with labouring alone in that field, Herren gathered scholars in Toronto to a conference on “Insular Latin Studies,” the proceedings of which he published two years later. Over the years he shed considerable light on such obscure texts and authors as Virgilius Maro Grammaticus, John Scottus Eriugena, and the Cosmographia by the pseudonymous Aethicus Ister. His research trail led him again and again to Ireland, and the Irish contribution to early medieval Latinity and to English, Carolingian, and even Italian culture. Recognizing the rich diversity of medieval Latin, Herren in 1990 founded The Journal of Medieval Latin and has, as its editor, provided a home for medieval Latinists of all stripes.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1840.148

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublications of the journal of Medieval LatinSame topicSoviet and Russian HistoryFrench-language works237,207