MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972188183 · doi:10.5214/ans.0972.7531.1118302

Gitanjali and neuroscience-I

2011· article· en· W1972188183 on OpenAlexaff
Abrahim H. Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurosciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceNeuroscienceData scienceBioinformaticsPsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A connection between noble prize winning Gitanjali, the celebrated English collection of Tagore’s poems, and neuroscience may at first seem far fetched. For “Gitanjali” literally means “song  offerings,” and the poems are suggestive of harmony, beauty, relationality, at the least. Tagore, employing 12,091 words and a lexicon with slightly fewer than 2,468 word types,1 renders in  English what he had composed originally in Bengali for singing. The collection, consisting of 103 poems composed before 1910, translated in 1912 and published in 1913, won for him the Nobel Prize the very  year of its publication.  Neuroscience was still in its  infancy then. doi : 10.5214/ans.0972.7531.1118302

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.300
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.061 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurosciencesSame topicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionFrench-language works237,207