MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7139427518

Codex Michael Michaelis

2009· article· W7139427518 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Michaelis

Bibliographic record

VenueDoria (University of Helsinki) · 2009
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Legal Studies and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Latin AmericansPoliticsHealth centre
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kirjanen on Michael Michaeliksen, Naantalin kappalaisen, Mikael Agricolan aikalaisen ja oppilaan käsikirjoitus, joka voidaan ajoittaa 1500-luvun lopulle. Kyseessä on ns. sekakirjanen, joka sisältää eri kirkkolaulujen traditioista syntyneitä sävelmiä erikielisine sanoituksineen. Kirjaseen kuuluu mm. luterilainen graduale, ruotsalainen kyriale, latinalainen hymnikokoelma, Te Deum käännöksineen ja muutamia muita kappaleita, joita joko seurakunta tai kuoro lauloivat kirkoissa. A liturgical miscellany, consisting of a tonarium, parts of a graduale (including a kyriale), sequentiarium and a hymnarium, produced by one scribe, probably for his own use, in the last quarter of the sixteenth century. Complete critical and codicological description of the book and its contents available in the Codices Fennici -database. <b>Contents:</b> Fols. 1r–8v, 9r–v, tonarium (defect); Fols. 10r–14v, sequentiarium in Latin (defect); Fols. 15r–24r, Te Deum in Latin (defect), O Jumala sinua me kijtämme (Te Deum in Finnish), O Gudh wij lofwe tig och bekenne tig (Te Deum in Swedish), O Gudh wij lofwe tig, o Gudh wij tacke tig (rhymed Te Deum in Swedish) and O Jumal sinua kijtäm (rhymed Te Deum in Finnish); Fols. 24r–32r, Kyriale in Swedish; Fols. 32r–40v, sequentiarium in Latin; Fols. 41r–42v, 43br–v, 43r–v, 44r–56v, hymnarium in Latin; Fol. [b]. "| co | side [verso] |orum | signifi |"; Fols. [c–k], fragments without legible text.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.696
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.223
Teacher spread0.211 · 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.

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDoria (University of Helsinki)Same topicHistorical Legal Studies and SocietyFrench-language works237,207