The "Last Judgement" in the Baptistery of San Giovanni in Florence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il saggio è incluso in un volume al quale hanno contribuito numerosi autori nazionali e internazionali e in esso l'autrice analizza la raffigurazione a mosaico del Giudizio finale della volta del Battistero di Firenze. Punto di partenza per un'impresa che avrebbe valicato l'anno 1300, il Giudizio coinvolse i principali artisti attivi a Firenze nel terzo quarto del duecento: Meliore di Jacopo, l'anonimo Maestro della croce 434, Coppo di Marcovaldo. L'analisi condotta in questo contributo tocca gli aspetti della filologia dello stile, per la distinzione del contributo di ciascun autore, ma si estende all'analisi del significato di questa impresa nella società fiorentina del tempo, evidenziando in particolare il contributo di intellettuali di primissimo piano, come Brunetto Latino, per la redazione del complesso programma iconografico, destinato a evidenziare i valori etici e religiosi della città. // The essay is included in a volume to which numerous national and international authors contributed, and in it the author analyzes the mosaic depiction of the Last Judgment on the vault of the Florence Baptistery. The starting point for an undertaking that would cross the year 1300, the Judgment involved the principal artists active in Florence in the third quarter of the thirteenth century: Meliore di Jacopo, the anonymous Master of the Cross 434, and Coppo di Marcovaldo. The analysis conducted in this contribution touches on aspects of the philology of style, for the distinction of each author's contribution, but it extends to an analysis of the significance of this enterprise in Florentine society of the time, highlighting in particular the contribution of leading intellectuals, such as Brunetto Latino, to the drafting of the complex iconographic program, intended to highlight the city's ethical and religious values.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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".