MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1945410948 · doi:10.1002/2014eo360009

Dingwell, Head Receive 2013 N. L. Bowen Award: Citation for Donald B. Dingwell

2014· article· en· W1945410948 on OpenAlexaff
Kelly Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueEos · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitationPrivilege (computing)VolcanoEarth scienceSilicateHonorVolcanologyGeologyChemistryGeochemistryComputer scienceLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is my privilege and honor to deliver the citation for Don Dingwell to receive AGU's N. L. Bowen Award. Don's research has profoundly influenced our understanding of the properties of silicate melts, glasses, and magmas and the fundamental control they exert on magmatic, volcanic, and, recently, even on earthquake processes. Don's approach is experimental, and his studies have interrogated melts, glasses, and magmas for their transport, calorimetric, geophysical, and rheological properties, as well as the solubilities of volatile species. These experiments have been elegantly designed to elucidate properties that provide quantitative explanations for volcanic processes. He has a prodigious publication record, including many seminal “must‐read papers,” as evidenced by any bibliometrics you choose. Indeed, his research has changed the very way we communicate about volcanic processes by expanding our vocabulary to include “glass transition” or “melt relaxation.” In many ways, his research career has established what is a new, unique, and expanding line of science—“experimental volcanology.”

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.876

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2620.232

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEosSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207