MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967508960 · doi:10.1136/bmj.c6129

The advantages of solitude

2010· article· en· W1967508960 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Theodore Dalrymple

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Philosophy and Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolitudeIgnoranceQuarter (Canadian coin)HistoryArt historyArtLiteraturePhilosophyArchaeologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pascal once said that all the misfortunes of the world arose from our ignorance of how to stay quietly in a room; and certainly these days people seem more than ever in need of ceaseless stimulation, more or less as balloons need air to keep them inflated. But this complaint is not a new one; it was made by Johann Georg Zimmermann in the middle of the 18th century, for example. His book on the advantages of solitude went through many editions; indeed it has never been out of print long for a quarter of a millennium. Zimmermann (1728-95) was a Swiss doctor who became physician to George III, but only at Hanover. …

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.021
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0000.006
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicHistorical Philosophy and ScienceFrench-language works237,207