MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W563215955 · doi:10.2307/20476925

:<i>Plato's "Timaeus" as Cultural Icon</i>

2004· article· en· W563215955 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brent Adkins

Bibliographic record

VenueSixteenth Century Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconRelation (database)IslamLiteraturePhilosophyEpistemologyArtTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, Plato's Timaeus has recaptured the interest of scholars, sparking an exploration of the astonishing influence this work has had on a wide range of intellectual traditions. Plato's Timaeus as Cultural Icon brings together a group of leading experts from Canada, the United States, and Europe to examine the reception of Plato's Timaeus throughout history, as well as its impact on major intellectual and cultural traditions. Gretchen J. Reydams-Schils's enlightening introduction tackles the issue of why the Timaeus has enjoyed such tremendous cultural status, and sets the stage for the many topics covered in this volume, which include an assessment of the Timaeus' influence on Plato's successors, an examination of how it became connected to traditions of sacred texts, an analysis of the mind-body problem, the tradition of music and its relation to philosophy, the cultural impact of Calcidius' Latin translation of the work, and the interaction between the Timaeus and Islamic philosophy. As a collaborative effort of expert philosophers, classicists, and historians, this remarkable book serves as a wonderful starting point and research tool for anyone with an interest in Plato's Timaeus.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.242
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations19
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSixteenth Century JournalSame topicClassical Philosophy and ThoughtFrench-language works237,207