MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1871758988 · doi:10.29173/invoke16470

Discovering the AIDS virus: Scientific Progress through the Interaction of Human and Non-Human Actants

2012· article· en· W1871758988 on OpenAlex
Stefan Paul Dehod

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueINvoke · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpistemologyScientific discoveryHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Human scienceSociologyCognitive sciencePsychologyPhilosophyBiologyVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The notion that science progresses through the actions of scientists on a nature characterized as passive is hardly new to most. While scholars like Thomas Kuhn have challenged the concept of science as one of progression others such as Bruno Latour have challenged and continue to challenge the idea of nature as passive. Focusing on the discovery HIV in the Pasteur Institute this paper will further challenge the way in which science is viewed as progressing by illustrating the unacknowledged factor of chance in the discovery. Finally, through use of Latour’s theoretical contributions, the interaction of human and non-human actants in the process of discovery illuminate the inadequacies of viewing nature as an order revealed by scientists and the constructivist view that nature is ordered by scientists.

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.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.337 · 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