MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409817428 · doi:10.21983/p3.0205.1.32

Is the Academic Medievalist Alone?

2018· book-chapter· en· W4409817428 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePunctum Books · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trend towards a “shrinking past”1 is undoubtedly a reality that those of us working in American and Canadian universi-ties have known for many years now. Humanities disciplines, devoted more than others to the study of the past, have suffered inordinately from this situation. The result, one that we as me-dievalists know all too well, is that we end up being the sole departmental expert on the entire pre-1700 (mostly European) world. The reasons for this historiographical downsizing are complex: administrative proclamations of declining interest in the humanities in general are but one piece of the historical puz-zle. There is no need to enter into this debate here, though; what matters is the result. Where there used to be two, three or more medievalists, there is now barely one: a single soul who is often asked to also teach outside the period on more “relevant” issues. So, one it is. But does that make this sole specialist a lonely re-searcher? And is this a novelty?

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.006

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.167 · 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