MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121627785 · doi:10.1001/archopht.118.10.1425

Baruch Spinoza<subtitle>Heretic, Lens Grinder</subtitle>

2000· article· en· W2121627785 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Steven Nadler

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Ophthalmology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval and Classical Philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubtitleHeresyQuarter (Canadian coin)HebrewJudaismTheologyHistoryArtPhilosophyLiteratureLinguisticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On July 27, 1656, the following text was read in Hebrew in front of the ark of the Portuguese-Jewish synagogue on the Houtgracht in the Vlooienburg quarter of Amsterdam where the Sephardic Jews (as well as their poorer Ashkenazic neighbors) tended to reside:

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0790.030

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of OphthalmologySame topicMedieval and Classical PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207