MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135666713

Pious gifts of the wives of kings of Bohemia from the House of Luxembourg and other displays of their favor to the Church

2025· dissertation· cs· W7135666713 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Veronika Hejlová

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2025
Typedissertation
Languagecs
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Archaeological Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWifeSpace (punctuation)Point (geometry)Work (physics)Period (music)Quarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The thesis deals with pious gifts of the wives of kings of Bohemia from the house of Luxembourg and other displays of their favor to the church, starting with Elisabeth of Přemyslid. The series of examined queens ends with the second wife of Wenceslas IV., Sophia of Bavaria. The purpose is to point out the personal involvement of the queens, the possibilities of their manifestations and realization. In the thesis, in addition to recording specific gifts, I try to observe what types of gifts the queens gave to church institutions and individuals. I focused my research on questions of whether queens maintained continuity with the church activities of their predecessors and previous kings of Bohemia, or whether they were influenced by the traditional directions of the church policy of the house from which they came and by blood relatives. The thesis also devotes space to the question of how much the direction of the queen's support corresponded to the church policy of her husband, whether the spouses targeted the same recipients and whether they ever showed favor with a common gift. Above that, the work attempts to outline the extent to which the direction of favor may have been influences by the court that surrounded the queen. It also attempts to evaluate the displays of favor in terms of...

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.546
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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 venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)Same topicHistorical and Archaeological StudiesFrench-language works237,207