MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6922280086

Uwagi o wczesnych gotyckich płytach nagrobnych na Śląsku

2023· article· de· W6922280086 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2023
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Methods and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTypologyRepresentation (politics)ClothingQuarter (Canadian coin)PaintingPeriod (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ROMUALD KACZMAREK (University of Wroclaw) / Notes on early gothic tombstones in Silesia (with particular reference to figural ones) The article discusses a group of the oldest Gothic tombstones in Silesia, dating from the late 13th to the end of the first quarter of the 14th century. They are distinguished by an engraved or sculpted representation of the figure of the de- ceased. They are an important testimony to the changes in the typology of sepul- chral monuments at the end of the 13th century. In view of the uncertain informa- tion regarding the earliest sarcophagi with carved figures or the disputed dating of those that remain, the slabs in question are the oldest evidence of this type of monument in Silesia. The linear form of the representation of the figures on the slabs is close to the art of drawing, hence these monuments should be regarded as an important addition to the knowledge of Silesian painting and drawing in a period from which we do not have a significant number of accounts. The analy- sis of the costumes of the depicted lay and clerical figures allows us to gain new information about this sphere of material culture, as well as about the symbolism expressed by the clothing and the attributes presented. The article also proposes revisions to some of the previous findings regarding the identification of com- memorated individuals.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.032

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.296 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicEducation Methods and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207