The Arthur of Medieval Latin literature : the development and dissemination of the Arthurian legend in Medieval Latin
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Section One: The Seeds of History and Legend 1) The Chroniclers of Early Britain NICK HIGHAM, University of Manchster 2) Arthur in Early Saints' Lives ANDREW BREEZE, Departamento de Linguistica Hispanica y Lenguas Modernas, Pamplona, Spain Section Two: Geoffrey of Monmouth 3) Geoffrey of Monmouth SIAN ECHARD 4) Geoffrey and the Prophetic Tradition JULIA CRICK, University of Exeter Section Three: Chronicles and Romances 5) Latin Historiography after Geoffrey of Monmouth AD PUTTER, University of Bristol 6) Glastonbury EDWARD DONALD KENNEDY, University of North Carolina 7) Romance ELIZABETH ARCHIBALD, University of Bristol Section Four: After the Middle Ages 8) Arthur and the Antiquaries JAMES P. CARLEY, York University, Toronto 3) Geoffrey of Monmouth SIA N ECHARD 4) Geoffrey and the Prophetic Tradition JULIA CRICK, University of Exeter Section Three: Chronicles and Romances 5) Latin Historiography after Geoffrey of Monmouth AD PUTTER, University of Bristol 6) Glastonbury EDWARD DONALD KENNEDY, University of North Carolina 7) Romance ELIZABETH ARCHIBALD, University of Bristol Section Four: After the Middle Ages 8) Arthur and the Antiquaries JAMES P. CARLEY, York University, Toronto
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it