MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6964763773 · doi:10.25446/oxford.13820831

E02386: Gregory of Tours, in his Histories (10.24), recounts how in 573 invading Persians had tried unsuccessfully to burn the church of 'the forty-eight martyrs' in Armenia (certainly the *Forty Martyrs of Sebaste, S00103); Gregory hears the story from Bishop Simon, who arrived in Tours in 591. Gregory mentions that he had recorded it in his 'book of miracles' (= Glory of the Martyrs). Written in Latin in Tours (north-west Gaul), 591/594.

2017· other· en· W6964763773 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Oxford · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Ecology and Soil Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiracleAfterlifeQuarter (Canadian coin)Funeral Rites

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gregory of Tours, Histories (Historiae) 10.24 Tunc etiam et basilica sanctorum quadraginta octo martyrum, de quibus in libro Miraculorum memini, qui in illa regione passi sunt, obpleta ligni congeriae, pice tergoribusque suellinis inmixtis, subpositis ardentibus facibus, succendere nisi sunt; sed nequaquam ab igne apparatum incendii conpraehendit, sicque videntes magnalia Dei, recesserunt ab ea. 'It was on this occasion that they [the Persians] had tried to burn down the church of the Forty-eight Saints and Martyrs, who met their death in that region, as I have described in my Book of Miracles. They piled the church high with heaps of wood soaked in pitch and pigs’ fat, and then set blazing torches to it. Despite all their efforts this inflammable material would not catch fire, and when they saw this miracle performed by God they left the church.' Text: Krusch and Levison 1951, 515-516. Translation: Thorpe 1974, 582.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

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 studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.015

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of OxfordSame topicPlant Ecology and Soil ScienceFrench-language works237,207