MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034913112 · doi:10.4000/clio.229

Lesley SMITH et Jane H. M. TAYLOR (dir.), Women and the Book : Assessing the Visual Evidence, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, London, The British Library, 1997.

2000· article· en· W2034913112 on OpenAlexaffabout
Antonietta Di Vito

Bibliographic record

VenueClio · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLibraries, Manuscripts, and Books
Canadian institutionsECW Press (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtSAINTArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet ouvrage collectif, fruit d'un colloque tenu au College Saint Hilda d'Oxford au cours de l'été 1993, réunit quatorze contributions qui ont pour point commun d'interroger la relation entre la ...

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.009

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.161 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClioSame topicLibraries, Manuscripts, and BooksFrench-language works237,207