Pesquisas documentales para narrar la historia de San Isidro: Gestiones para una canonización iniciada en 1562
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Documental Investigations to Narrate the History of San Isidoro. Procedure \nfor the Canonization Begun in 1562\nThe history of the canonization process of San Isidro has reached us in somewhat \ndisfigured version. The process began formally in 1562 and not in 1593 as the official \nhistoriography would have it. There is also some confusion as to who instigated the \ncanonization. In fact, there were a number of instigators, as I make clear in this \narticle.\n \nAmong the actions taken to defend the canonization, was the creation of a \nnarrative version of Isidro�s life and miracles. This served to reconstruct a new reality from the vague details of a life that took place in the eleventh century and was based \non oral history. Some authors also consulted the Madrid municipal archives for \ninformation on the saint. This subject, more legendary than real, was paradoxically the \nonly historical subject investigated in the municipal archives in the period of Philip II.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".