A Platonic Pythagoras: Platonism and Pythagoreanism in the Imperial Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This volume collects the papers presented at a colloquium of the same title held at Gargagno on Lake Garda in April 2005, and becomes now the second in a new series of publications of colloquia in ancient philosophy, Diatribai, edited by the above distinguished trio.It is as such warmly to be welcomed.There are nine papers, ranging chronologically from Philo of Alexandria to Proclus, and having as an overall theme the various modes of appropriation of 'Pythagorean' themes in the Platonism of the Imperial period.The papers are as follows: Carlos Lévy, 'La question de la dyade chez Philon d'Alexandrie' Francesca Calabi, 'Filone di Alessandria e Ecfanto.Un confronto possibile' Daniel Babut, 'L'unité de l'Académie selon Plutarque.Notes en marge d'un débat ancien et toujours actuel' Pierluigi Donini, 'Tra Academia e pitagorismo.Il platonismo nel De genio Socratis di Plutarco' Christoph Helmig, 'The Relationship between Forms and Numbers in Nicomachus' Introduction to Arithmetic' Dominic O'Meara, 'Hearing the Harmony of the Spheres in Late Antiquity' Elena Gritti, 'Insegnamento pitagorico e metodo dialettico in Proclo' Alessandro Linguiti, 'Prospettiva pitagorica e prospettiva platonica nella filosofia della natura di Proclo' Carlos Steel, 'Proclus on Divine Figures: An Essay on Pythagorean-Platonic Theology'.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".