Bibliologiczne i religioznawcze studia nad książką hebrajską : zbiór esejów
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presented essays are divided into three groups. The first article concerns the book produced by Jews in Central and Eastern Europe against the background of the world production of Hebrew books. The second, the printing of the New Testament in Yiddish (Hebrew fonts) in the first half of the 16th century in Krakow. This also includes two articles on the Talmud. The first article illustrates the intellectual effort of Polish Jews who faced the challenge of printing Talmudic tractates with valuable documentary annexes. The second presents the difficulties that the Jewish printers had to face when persecuted by the Polish censorship authorities. The last group opens with an article describing one of the most valuable European collections of Judaica - old prints from the Jagiellonian Library in Krakow, from the former Prussian State Library in Berlin. The second presents a part of the Saraval’s collection - priceless Hebrew incunabula that were transferred from Prague to Wrocław. The third concerns the 14th century Wolff Haggadah with a "Polish" episode in the background. Together, all the articles form a selective introduction to the little-known world of the Hebrew book.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".