MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023873078 · doi:10.1029/2012eo070006

Ian S. E. Carmichael (1930–2011)

2012· article· en· W2023873078 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R. A. Lange

Bibliographic record

VenueEos · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilicicGeologyIgneous rockCrustMagmaBasaltGeochemistryVolcano

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ian S. E. Carmichael, who had a highly imaginative research career and was legendary for his successful mentoring of graduate students, died in Berkeley, Calif., on 26 August 2011. Ian applied thermodynamic theory, experiment, and the ground truth of fieldwork to the study of magmatic rocks. Throughout the arc of his career, he played a critical role in transforming igneous petrology from a discipline that was largely descriptive to one that is rigorously quantitative. Ian was born in London on 29 March 1930 and was educated at Westminster School. He spent 2 years in the British Army (as a parachutist and a second lieutenant in the Corps of Royal Engineers), where he saw service in Egypt, Palestine, and Sudan. He obtained his B.A. and M.A. in geology at Cambridge University in 1954 and then traveled to Canada, where he prospected for copper and wintered in the Arctic. Ian returned to England and obtained his Ph.D. in 1958 at Imperial College London. His thesis, on Thingmuli volcano in eastern Iceland, addressed one of the most contentious issues in Earth science at the time (before the days of isotope geochemistry and plate tectonics), namely, the origin of silicic magma from basalt in the absence of preexisting continental crust. The problem went to the heart of crustal evolution.

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)0.003
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.027

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.176 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEosSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207