Mark J. Clark The Making of the «Historia scholastica», 1150-1200 Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies («Studies and Texts», 198), Toronto 2015, 322 pp.[RESEÑA]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
sin que se relacionaran con su origen.Giovanni Tangorra, Profesor Ordinario de la misma universidad, se centra en la eclesiología del Lateranense iv para compararla con la enseñanza del Concilio Vaticano ii.La aportación más extensa en este apartado es del Profesor Santiago del Cura Elena, de la Facultad de Teología de Burgos, que estudia la relación entre sacerdocio ministerial y Eucaristía en el Lateranense iv, mostrando el criterio orientador que aporta -a distancia de siglos-para los desafíos y discusiones actuales en este tema.La última parte del volumen recoge, siempre en una lectura teológica, soluciones prácticas de diversa índole, emanadas del mismo concilio: la legislación con respecto a las iglesias orientales, disposiciones litúrgicas y la disciplina de los sacramentos, la predicación, la formación del clero, las Ordenes Mendicantes, herejía y represión, y finalmente las relaciones con los judíos.La última contribución del volumen corre a cargo del Profesor Lubomir Žak (Universidad Lateranense) y consiste en un balance de todos los trabajos, su utilidad actual y posible proyección futura.En definitiva, la obra constituye una aportación valiosa y útil tanto para las distintas disciplinas teológicas como para el Derecho Canónico y la medievalística.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.007 |
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".