MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1885936000

Development of geology in Spain: a case study of a marginal science

2015· article· en· W1885936000 on OpenAlex
P. Santanach

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies in Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnlightenmentMainstreamQuarter (Canadian coin)State (computer science)GeologyArchaeologyPolitical scienceGeographyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geology in Spain developed outside the mainstream of major geological ideas. Geology was introduced intothe country when it had already grown mature. The history of geology in Spain is series of initiatives aimedat aligning the country with the innovative currents taking place in the rest of Europe. This was accomplishedby different protagonists: state and private institutions during the Enlightenment, mining engineers in the 19th century, church and regional authorities in Catalonia in the last quarter of the 19th century and in the early years of the 20th century, and the university in the 20th century. The importance of the links with foreign geologists shouldnot be underestimated. Not until the 20th century did improvement in living standards and university expansionallow Spanish geology to attain the critical number of scientists needed to undertake quality research and achievefull integration into the international community.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.528
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.028 · 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