MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7056497739

Estudio introductorio y edición crítica del libro X del De procuranda salute omnium gentium (1613) de Tomás de Jesús

2025· article· ca· W7056497739 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageca
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OxfordModernaUniversidad de SevillaUniversitatea SapientiaUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsNucleofectionHyporeflexiaLiquationFusible alloyGestational periodContext (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El De procuranda salute omnium gentium, que va publicar el carmelitza descalç Tomàs de Jesús el 1613, s'inscriu dins de la incipient política missional que va acabar instituint anys més tard la Santa Seu, amb la fundació de la Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide el 1622. Tractant-se d'una obra d'una obra caràcter compilatori, el llibre que dedica a l'islam, el llibre X, se serveix de la tradició polèmica antiislàmica medieval i de la primera Edat Moderna per articular un discurs confutatori que doni lloc a la conversió dels musulmans. Encara que el 1939 s'iniciés un projecte d'edició de l'obra completa, aquest va acabar ocupant-se únicament dels quatre primers llibres, deixant la resta a mercè de l'escassa literatura crítica posterior. Aquesta tesi ofereix la primera edició crítica del llibre X, inscrivint-lo en aquest context polèmic i actualitzant-ne els criteris editorials. Precedeix al text un estudi introductori que comprèn la biografia de l'autor, el context en què es gesta l'obra completa, un estudi analític de les fonts usades en la compilació i la càrrega polèmica, i una notícia sobre les lectures posteriors que va generar l'aproximació a l'islam proposada per l'autor.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona)Same topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207