SOUL MADE FLESH: THE ENGLISH CIVIL WAR AND THE MAPPING OF THE MIND * Carl Zimmer * 2004. London: Heinemann * Price 17.99. ISBN 0434010464
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For more than a century, admirers of the life and work of Thomas Willis (1621–1675) have tried to retrieve him from the penumbra cast by the historical limelight of his famous Oxford compatriots—Harvey, Sydenham,Boyle, Wren and Lower—and his brilliant students Hooke and Locke. Their sustained efforts have had some success. Charles Sherrington (1951) put it unequivocally. ‘Thomas Willis practically refounded the anatomy and physiology of the brain and nerves…. He collated bedside observation with anatomical fact. He, as had Fernel, a century before him, shifted the seat of the anima from the chambers of the brain to the actual substance of the brain itself.… Willis put the brain and the nervous system on their modern footing so far as that could be then done.’ Charles Symonds (1955) was one of the first to point out the clinical significance of observations by Willis and his team on the anatomy and physiology of the cerebral circulation and to emphasize the innovative role of Willis as a physician who combined a busy medical practice with his role as head of a team of neurological investigators. Symonds (1960) sampled earlier protagonists of Willis by quoting Soury (1899). ‘Que l'on considere la structure, les fonctions ou les maladies de cerveau, surtout les grands nevroses, telles que l'epilepsie et l'hysterie, il n'est pas un point de fait ou de doctrine dans lequel on ne puisse encore demeler aujourd'hui l'influence de Willis, et l'on se persuade sans peine en realisant les oeuvres du vieux maitre que la force vive de son genie n'est pas encore epuisee.’ And Symonds concluded about Thomas Willis, ‘As a man he was not a courtier but a pious industrious person whose medical practice was informed by the search for truth and whose success as a doctor must be attributed as much—perhaps …
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it