Les mires méridiennes lointaines de l’Observatoire de Lyon : Recherches bibliographiques, archivistiques et archéologiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first argument set out in 1877 by the Parisian astronomer Charles André, founder of the Observatoire de Lyon, to justify the establishment of an astronomical institute in Saint-Genis-Laval was the fact that it offered the opportunity to install remote marks along its meridian. André had used this argument three years before to reject another site selected by a local committee. However, at that time remote meridian marks had been abandoned by most astronomers in favour of close ones. We have conducted field research to discover the remains of these marks, as well as to seek evidence – both in the literature and in archives – of their use. This investigation shows that the argument for remote marks was in fact driven by geodetic considerations. The choice of Saint-Genis-Laval was actually made by geodesists of the Dépôt Général de la Guerre and its director, François Perrier, who wanted to institute new observatories in Province as key points in the primary geodetic network of France.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".