Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quid est Veritas?"What is truth?"Pontius Pilate, the Roman Procurator of Judaea, allegedly said in response to Jesus Christ's claim that everyone of the truth would hear his voice (John 18: 38).Whether Pilate asked this question because he had insufficient information to ascertain whether Christ's account or his accusers' was accurate, or because he was reflecting an expedient political view, Pilate's question can be applied to research based on information gathered from the Internet.For several years many educational authorities in North America, as well as those in the Antipodes and Western Europe, have hailed the Internet as a great research resource.No longer does a scholar have to traverse the globe physically in search of rare and elusive sources.Many are now available on the Internet.Indeed the initiative of the Vatican libraries to digitize and post to their Web site many of their holdings enables unique and fragile ancient and medieval manuscripts to be accessible both to the scholar who spends her or his lifetime researching in such realms and to the layperson (Vatican Library, 2006).Even a curious primary school student can view such rare documents.Other libraries and archives also make at least some of their holdings available through the Internet, such as the Provincial Archives of British Columbia (British Columbia Provincial Archives, 2006).On the other hand, the Internet has made it easier for those who lack ethics and scruples in research to engage in plagiarism.Moreover, the plethora of Web sites has created a virtual Tower of Babel of information.With some contentious or emotional topics, for example, it becomes almost impossible for the beginning researcher such as a school student not only to differentiate between what is true or false, but even to ascertain what is reasonable.To be sure, most teachers do not simply assign a research topic and then release their students to forage for whatever they can find.Usually some background is provided as well as guidance as to what sources might be considered appropriate.In the days before the Internet such instruction was usually sufficient, as what was available in school libraries or other local libraries had been selected and vetted by people who were largely able to distinguish reasonable scholarship from biased accounts and simple opinion pieces.This happy state of affairs disappeared with the advent of the Internet.The ubiquitous nature of the Internet, and the ease with which one can find information make the Internet, as attractive as the mythical song of the sirens.As teachers we may wish to emulate Odysseus, who filled the ears of his crew with wax so that they could not hear the sirens' song (Homer, 2002).However, our students are not a ship's crew, and we cannot exercise such control over them.Although to some degree we can present a nurturing and nonthreatening environment in school, much like what Friedrich Fröbel (1782-1852) desired for his kindergarten (Fletcher & Welton, 1912), we have little control over what the student does outside school.
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 | 0.010 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.027 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.024 |
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".