Bertell Ollman, <i>How to Take an Exam (. . .) and Remake the World.</i> Montreal: Black Rose Books, 2001. 191 pp. $48.99 cloth; $19.99 paper.
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
Bertell Ollman's book is almost impossible to review, and this for at least two reasons. The first is that it's a one-of-a-kind, so there is no book one can compare it with. The second is that he has already reviewed it himself, on page 180, rather favorably. The third is that he sent me a free copy, enclosing a review from Z Magazine, thus combining a bribe with yet another model interview (sub-species: favorable). The fourth is that the back-page “puffs,” evidently from some more of his fans, say it better, and more briefly, than I possibly could. Consider this from Savas Michael: “A wonderful combination of Oxford scholarship and clarity, Marxist insight, Jewish humor, and revolutionary pedagogy, i.e. Ollman at his best.”
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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