MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7038984536

Late Literature in the Sixth Century, East and West

2014· article· en· W7038984536 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLincoln Repository (University of Lincoln) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSpider Taxonomy and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101HyporeflexiaFusible alloyDysgeusiaPretext
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Society for Late Antique Literary Studies was cofounded by David Bright (Emory University), Scott McGill (Rice University), and Joseph Pucci (Brown University) in 2012, after a pair of conferences hosted at Rice University and Brown University in 2011. The organisers intend a broad definition of literature — Christian as well as secular, high as well as low — and envision the sharing of work on literary studies, East and West. This was the first of a series of biennial or annual conferences. The conference limited its focus to the rich body of literature surviving from the sixth century. The organisers encouraged contributions focused on the Greek east, or on the connections between eastern and western literature. This brought together classicists, Latinists, and medievalists in fruitful debate and conversation. The fifteen papers presented over the course of two days were given in the Annmary Brown Memorial (www.library.brown.edu/about/amb/). In what follows, I will summarize each paper and the conversation it provoked, concluding with a general summary of particular themes drawn out by presenters.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0070.011
Scholarly communication0.0140.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.180 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLincoln Repository (University of Lincoln)Same topicSpider Taxonomy and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207