Pedro Martín Martínez, Profesor de Anatomía del Hospital General de Madrid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The study of the anatomical works written by Martín Martinez and his relationship with urology. Also, the appreciation of his open scientific mentality and scepticism in a historic environment imbued of a scholastic spirit and dogmatism. METHODS: Several Martin Martinez's works were reviewed, mainly the treaty Complete human anatomy, entire text obtained from the electronic page of the Complutense University library, and also the words from other authors of his time. RESULTS: The medical and philosophical personality of Martin Martinez and his influence in the medical knowledge in the Spanish Court during the first quarter of the 18th century are ascertained. The importance he had as Professor of anatomy in the functioning and development of the Madrid's Anatomical Amphitheater in the General Hospital and his positive repercussion on the training of students and surgeons of that time and posterior years is appreciated. Writing his works in Spanish contributed to it. CONCLUSIONS: Although he cannot be considered an outstanding scientific personality in comparison with authors from other European countries, he must be recognized for his great merit with his open mind and his labour against dogmatism in front of the blocked-in-servility medical mentality, and also in the study of classic authors from previous centuries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".