MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7094716347

9781802702811.pdf

2024· other· en· W7094716347 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOAPEN (The OAPEN Foundation) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungUniversität SalzburgUniversity of TorontoUniversité de FribourgUniversity of OxfordUniversity of Notre Dame
KeywordsPerformative utteranceContext (archaeology)Relevance (law)Drama
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medieval women were active in many performative activities, including plays and ceremonies performed in nunneries. This volume focuses on monastic performances and, in particular, on performances given in the English abbey of Barking. The Barking ceremonies, commonly referred to as the Elevatio and Visitatio sepulchri, display complex ties with both drama and liturgy. The book uses historical and archaeological evidence to propose a discussion of the nuns’ participation in these ceremonies—as performers, but also as scribes, composers, and patrons—and of the Elevatio and Visitatio’s potential effects on their performers and spectators. It goes on to address related questions through the lens of a modern performance of the ceremonies, considering their relevance today. Discussion is presented within the context of a general overview of female performance in the Middle Ages.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9850.994

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.212 · 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