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
The approach here entertained presupposes a fresh theory of world pictures (Weltanschauungen) of higher civilizations. For the historian's idea of historical facts presupposes a world picture, except for societies which lack a written language. That is why the historical reason discussed here is limited to the kind of history which deals with higher civilizations. The analysis of world pictures used here itself presupposes that symbols are all-important and that they lose their symbolic power if attached to a static meaning. As in Jung's theory, a symbol has the ability to be active in the mined as a transformer of consciousness, free to associate with new experiences and thinking. This theory gives special attention to Dilthey's problem: that of the rational quality of historical facts. World pictures, which give deep meanings to many historical facts, are made up of symbols and metaphors, including ideas, images, values, and emotions. These world styles are almost entirely unconscious. It is true that historians can have deliberate, conscious definitions of such worldviews as those of the Greek and Chinese civilizations.Since the actual Weltbilt is much more complex and largely unconscious, only something more than a logical definition will suffice to understand it.This paper indicates the way in which a rational understanding of world pictures can be attained.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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