MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1642983250

THE MILLMAN FIREBALL ARCHIVE

2003· article· en· W1642983250 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Martin Beech

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTime Series Analysis and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeteoroidPopulationEvent (particle physics)PhysicsAstrophysicsAstronomyDemography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Millman Fireball Archive is a collection of 3876 report cards relating to 2129 visually-observed fireball meteors, seen from across Canada in the time interval 1962 to 1989. We provide an overview of the origin of the archive and present tables describing the monthly and yearly fireball numbers. We also present a selection of statistical results relating to fireball sounds (both sonic and simultaneous), finding that approximately one in fifteen of the observed fireball events was identified as producing some distinctive sound phenomenon. It is found that if sonic booms are associated with a given fireball event then some 12.8 ± 9.0 percent of the reports note the occurrence; if simultaneous sounds are associated with a fireball then 5.7 ± 1.8 percent of the reports acknowledge its detection. In addition, a comparison between the visually observed fireballs and the MORP camera survey results reveals that on average the visual observers recorded about one in five of the photographed fireball events. Finally, we find that a remarkably good, linear relationship exists between the average number of fireball events recorded per year and population density. As oft along the still and pure serene, At nightfall glides a sudden trail of fire, Attracting with involuntary heed, The eye to follow it, ere while it rest, And seems some star that shifted place in heaven

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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.484
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0110.014
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0580.033

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.159
Teacher spread0.155 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Astronomical Society of CanadaSame topicTime Series Analysis and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207