MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1916531774

THE RENAISSANCE AROUND US

2011· article· es· W1916531774 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHispana · 2011
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistory of Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe RenaissanceSurpriseFifteenthPhraseApothecaryHistoryClassicsArtLiteratureArt historySociologyPhilosophyLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.171 · 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