MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402067706 · doi:10.62051/zxb1hg66

An Inquiry into Renaissance Art and Literature

2024· article· en· W4402067706 on OpenAlexaff
Zijing Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions on Social Science Education and Humanities Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRenaissance and Early Modern Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Arts FoundationUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe RenaissanceArtArt historyVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Renaissance (14th to 17th centuries) is an important period in European history, known as the Golden Age of art and literature. This period began in Italy and gradually spread to other parts of Europe. The Renaissance was a revolt against the feudal system and religious dogma of the Middle Ages, and a revolution in thought and culture. Humanism, the core ideology of the period, emphasized human values and rationality and encouraged individuals to pursue knowledge and self-realization. At the same time, art as well as literature began to be produced in great numbers, taking on a completely different appearance from that which existed before the beginning of the movement. The art and literature of this period reflected a major shift in human thought from the religious confinement of the Middle Ages to a focus on humanism and personal values. This paper examines the major art forms of the Renaissance and their representatives and analyzes the development of literature and its influence at the time. Through an in-depth analysis of Renaissance art and literature, it reveals the importance of the period in shaping modern European culture and thought..

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0100.008
Science and technology studies0.0110.032
Scholarly communication0.0120.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.188
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions on Social Science Education and Humanities ResearchSame topicRenaissance and Early Modern StudiesFrench-language works237,207