MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1564774478 · doi:10.1093/jhmas/jrn036

Diagnosing Genius: The Life and Death of Beethoven

2008· article· en· W1564774478 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P. A. Mackowiak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistory of Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeniusQueen (butterfly)GerontologyArt historyArtHistoryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unrelenting illness plagued Beethoven throughout his entire adult life. His disorder (or disorders) produced myriad physical and psychological torments, the etiology of which has never been diagnosed definitively. For him the most distressing consequence of his illness was its effect on the auditory nerves, which it left shrunken and useless after causing years of pain and ringing in the ears. The disorder's most lethal effect, however, was its destruction of the liver, which it rendered fibrotic and riddled with nodules “the size of a bean” (135), causing secondary ascites, an enlarged spleen, nose bleeds, and bleeding esophageal varices. These were its dominant features. However, numerous other associated abnormalities have complicated efforts to identify a unifying diagnosis. There were decades of recurrent abdominal pain and diarrhea, attacks of bronchitis and feverish catarrhs (with no gross postmortem pulmonary pathology), repeated episodes of rheumatism, tormenting headaches, and postmortem abnormalities of the brain, pancreas, and kidneys. There were also possible episodes of smallpox and typhus, heavy alcohol consumption, a family history of alcoholism, sexual promiscuity (at least late in life), and high levels of lead detected in samples of hair analyzed over a century and a half after the composer's death.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.102 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the History of Medicine and Allied SciencesSame topicHistory of Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207