Tables of Declination from Ptolemy to Regiomontanus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: The inclination of the path of the Sun in the sky with respect to the celestial equator, that is, the obliquity of the ecliptic, has been a major concern for astronomers since Antiquity. Many of them adopted values for it that departed from those of their predecessors and hardly any were the result of observation. Solar declination depends strictly on the obliquity, and many tables for determining solar positions were compiled during the Middle Ages. In this paper, we examine several of them, particularly those by Abraham ibn Ezra, Giovanni Bianchini, and Regiomontanus, the last two associated with tables for the conversion of ecliptic to equatorial coordinates. How to cite: Goldstein, B. R. and J. Chabás†. “Tables of Declination from Ptolemy to Regiomontanus”. Aestimatio: Sources and Studies in the History of Science (2024) 5: std01 1–37. https://doi.org/10.33137/aestimatio.v5.45497
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.019 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".