MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030029972 · doi:10.3138/jsp.44.3.002

Disruptive Technological History: Papermaking to Digital Printing

2013· article· en· W2030029972 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Scholarly Publishing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLibraries, Manuscripts, and Books
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPapermakingOffset printingPublishingDigital printingHistory of the bookFifteenthPrinting pressHistoryEngineeringVisual artsAncient historyArt historyComputer scienceArtPolitical scienceMechanical engineeringPulp and paper industryLawInkwell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disruptive technologies have been crucial to the shaping of publishing history. Paradoxically, while each of the technologies—specifically, the evolution of papermaking in Europe starting in the late thirteenth century, Gutenberg's printing press and type-casting from metal in the fifteenth century, lithographic offset printing in the twentieth century, and digital printing in the twenty-first century—has, on its own, been indeed revolutionary in nature, together they have served their role in the evolution of the publishing industry. Simply put, the present publishing industry would not be where it is without them.

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.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0650.150
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.022 · 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