MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408141267 · doi:10.1093/notesj/gjaf030

Another Token of <i>ofþe</i>

2025· article· en· W4408141267 on OpenAlexaff
Elena Afros

Bibliographic record

VenueNotes and Queries · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Jerome's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecurity tokenComputer scienceComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The form ofþe is a very rare variant of the Old English conjunction oþþe ‘or’. So far, this form has been identified in five manuscripts: one token is attested in the ink glosses to Aldhelm, De laudibus virginitatis in New Haven, Yale University, Beinecke Library 401 rendering uel (x2; Napier #177)1; one token in the copy of Werferth’s translation of Gregory’s Dialogues in London, British Library, Cotton Otho C. i., vol. 2 (xi1; 36r; Hecht 108.28; O)2; one token in the Record of the Dues Pertaining to Taunton in the Codex Wintoniensis (London, British Library, Add. 15350; xii1; Winchester; Robertson 236.31)3; at least twenty-three tokens in the copy of King Alfred’s Old English translation of Pope Gregory the Great’s Regula pastoralis in Cambridge, Trinity College R. 5. 22 (ff. 72–158; x/xi; ?Sherborne; T); and two tokens in the copy of King Alfred’s Old English translation of Pope Gregory the Great’s Regula pastoralis in Cambridge, University Library Ii. 2. 4 (xi2; Exeter; U).4 The present article suggests that another token of ofþe occurs in Adrian and Ritheus, a question-and-answer list found in London, British Library, Cotton Julius A. ii, fols 137v–40.5 The form ofþe written occurs in the question about Noah on 138v: Saga me. hwa sette ærest wineardas. of þe hwa dranc ærest win Ic þe secge. Noe.6 ‘Tell me who first set vineyards or who first drank wine. I tell you, Noah.’

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.022
Scholarly communication0.0110.016
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0060.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.010

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNotes and QueriesSame topicClassical Antiquity StudiesFrench-language works237,207