MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098580478 · doi:10.5214/ans.0972.7531.180402

Postulating an Affinity: Amartya Sen on Capability and Tagore

2012· article· en· W2098580478 on OpenAlexaff
Abrahim H. Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurosciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicIndian History and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mahatma Gandhi was visiting Rabindranath Tagore’s School in Santiniketan, just outside Calcutta, India. A young girl approached him for an autograph. In her book he penned this entry: “Never make a promise in haste. Having once made it fulfil it at the cost of your life.” His words have crossed my mind more than once, especially the first part of the entry “never make a promise in haste” during the composition of this essay. I wondered whether the promise to deliver a keynote address1 was made too quickly, and whether I could deliver on it even at the cost of my life.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.018
Scholarly communication0.0080.011
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.275
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.054 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurosciencesSame topicIndian History and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207