MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135859311

The Age of Rudolph II because of Some German Written Documents from 1578-1598. A Historical and Linguistic Study.

2015· dissertation· de· W7135859311 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Diana Jamal-Aldinová

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languagede
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistic research and analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanCzechQuarter (Canadian coin)PoliticsAlchemyPeriod (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presented thesis deals with an analysis of five selected documents written in German and published by Rudolf II in Prague between 1578 and 1598. The textual source material therefore serves as an illustration of the German language used in the offices located on the Czech territory in the 16th century. The thesis is concerned with the political and social attitudes in the Czech lands in the last quarter of the 16th and at the beginning of the 17th century; the figure of Rudolf II and his relationship to Prague are also presented. Furthermore, the thesis mentions the main features and figures of the cultural life in Rudolfian Prague, alchemy and science, followed by a chapter describing Rudolf II's Prague office with regard to German as the language of the Prague office. The aim of the thesis is to textologically analyze the documents with a focus on their Macrostructure and Microstructure and therefore contribute to the research of the German language used in the offices in the last quarter of the 16th and at the beginning of the 17th century in the territory of the Czech lands.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)Same topicLinguistic research and analysisFrench-language works237,207