MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053572639 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511977626

Aristotle's <i>Nicomachean Ethics</i>

2011· book· en· W2053572639 on OpenAlexaff
Jon Miller, Michael Pakaluk, Susan Sauvé Meyer, Norman O. Dahl, A. A. Long, Klaus Corcilius, Giles Pearson, Iakovos Vasiliou, Christopher Shields, Stephen Leighton, T. H. Irwin, Hallvard Fossheim

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2011
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipHappinessValue (mathematics)Normative ethicsMeta-ethicsEnvironmental ethicsApplied ethicsSociologyPhilosophyEpistemologySocial scienceInformation ethicsPsychologyEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceSocial psychologyLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics is one of the most important ethical treatises ever written, and has had a profound influence on the subsequent development of ethics and moral psychology. This collection of essays, written by both senior and younger scholars in the field, presents a thorough and close examination of the work. The essays address a broad range of issues including the compositional integrity of the Ethics, the nature of desire, the value of emotions, happiness and the virtues. The result is a volume which will challenge and advance the scholarship on the Ethics, establishing new ways of viewing and appreciating the work for all scholars of Aristotle.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations41
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicLegal Education and Practice InnovationsFrench-language works237,207