MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7094177089

Head of a Jester

2002· article· W7094177089 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInsecta mundi · 2002
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicHistory of Medical Practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHead (geology)CarvingFace (sociological concept)GermanPerfection
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bite your tongue, or is it your lip? That is precisely what the fool, or jester, in the Large Head of a Jester (figure 89) is actively engaged in doing as he looks out in the direction of the viewer. A gift of the Trier-Fodor Foundation, this anonymous, German engraving of c. 1600 was acquired by the Art Gallery of Ontario, Toronto, in 1985. Image and text of this medium-sized print measure 360 x 277 mm; the sheet 402 x 312 mm. The laid paper bears a watermark of a shield incorporating a fat fleur-de-lys, or possibly a clover leaf. Nevertheless, this fascinating engraving has not been discussed in the literature. The jester is an impressive, if contradictory fellow. He wears a fool's cap replete with bells and cockscomb and several pins or badges of various sizes and shapes, yet he sports extremely well-clipped eyebrows and moustache, whose neatness directly contradicts his naturally ragged beard. But the beard appears to have been shaved at centre, where six warts, or related bumps, appear. Six more wart-like bumps cover the tip of his nose. The upper part of the jester's face is wrinkled and contorted as a result of biting his lip. His eyes, which include reflections of windows, look worried or distressed. What is the viewer to make of these various facial details, growths and expressions?

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.006

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.240 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsecta mundiSame topicHistory of Medical PracticeFrench-language works237,207