MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013672795 · doi:10.15173/russell.v33i2.2249

Rejoinder to Schiller’s “Choice”

2013· article· en· W2013672795 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bertrand Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhilosophy and Theoretical Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSection (typography)SphinxPhilosophyClassicsArt historyEpistemologyHistoryComputer scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article by F. C. S. Schiller to which Russell wrote the following untitled draft rejoinder was “Choice”, published in The Hibbert Journal 7 (July 1909): 802–12. Schiller’s article was in reply to Russell’s “Determinism and Morals”, ibid. 7 (Oct. 1908): 113–21. This article was, or just possibly was yet to become, section iv of “The Elements of Ethics”, reprinted in Philosophical Essays (1910), again in Paper 19 of Collected Papers 6, and now as 34 in Papers 5. Schiller appended his piece to the third edition of his Riddles of the Sphinx (Swan Sonnenschein, 1910), pp. 451–62. Russell's draft rejoinder is not included in Papers 5 and is thus supplied here.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.289 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell StudiesSame topicPhilosophy and Theoretical ScienceFrench-language works237,207