MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087703798 · doi:10.1215/00182702-2009-011

The Chicago School: How the University of Chicago Assembled Thinkers Who Revolutionized Economics and Business

2009· article· en· W2087703798 on OpenAlexaffabout
David Laidler

Bibliographic record

VenueHistory of Political Economy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconCitationSearch engine optimizationDownloadTable of contentsSection (typography)Library sciencePolitical scienceWorld Wide WebComputer scienceAdvertisingSearch engineBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Book Review| June 01 2009 The Chicago School: How the University of Chicago Assembled Thinkers Who Revolutionized Economics and Business David Laidler David Laidler Professor Emeritus University of Western Ontario Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google History of Political Economy (2009) 41 (2): 411–414. https://doi.org/10.1215/00182702-2009-011 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation David Laidler; The Chicago School: How the University of Chicago Assembled Thinkers Who Revolutionized Economics and Business. History of Political Economy 1 June 2009; 41 (2): 411–414. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/00182702-2009-011 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsHistory of Political Economy Search Advanced Search 2009 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal Issue Section: Book Reviews You do not currently have access to this content.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistory of Political EconomySame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207