Bibliographic record
Abstract
We are presently in the grip of the largest and grandest renaissance that the world has ever seen.This should come as no surprise.When we use the phrase, "the Renaissance," we generally mean the renaissance of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.Actually The Renaissance was invented in the nineteenth century.Until then, people didn't think in those terms: we had no word for it.Apparently, it took two and a half centuries for people to recover from that cultural convulsion sufficiently to discover a need for the word."Renaissance" debuts in English in 1845, coinciding with the invention of the telegraph, the technology which precipitated the first stage of the renaissance which now envelops us.Coincidentally, the same date saw the invention-a kind of renaissance-of dinosaurs.The word "dinosaur" too enters the language (1841) at the time of the telegraph.Everyone knew about those piles of old bones that littered the US landscape.In the nineteenth century, Americans even shipped railway cars full of them to Europe; Americans themselves, by and large, ignored them.So why should it take over two centuries to notice the 16 th -century tidal wave of rebirth and renewal?
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
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".