MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055927221

What is it and why should it interest historians? : feature : book history in Southern Africa

2006· article· en· W2055927221 on OpenAlex
Isabel Hofmeyr

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueSouth African Historical Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSouth African History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingHistoryHistory of AfricaMedia studiesLibrary scienceSociologyAncient historyPolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extracted from text ... 1. Some major centres for the study of book history include the Institute for English Studies, University of London; the University of Toronto; Jadavpur University; and the University of Edinburgh's Centre for the History of the Book. In South Africa, aspects of the field are taught as part of the Publishing Studies Programme, Department of Information Science, University of Pretoria; African Literature, University of the Witwatersrand; and the Centre for Book and Text Studies, Rhodes University. 1 South African Historical Journal, 55 (2006), 1-19 Book History in Southern Africa: What Is It and Why Should It Interest Historians? ISABEL HOFMEYR ..

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.208 · 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