Bibliographic record
Abstract
The International Geological Congress (IGC), originally the International Congress of Geologists, was founded on August 25, 1876, at the 25th Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, held in Buffalo, New York. The founding committee was composed of participants from the USA and Canada, with the addition of two geologists from Sweden and The Netherlands. Why did it take so many years after its establishment for the countries represented in the founding committee to host the IGC, beginning with the 5th IGC, held in Washington D.C. in 1893? The answer may be in documents, which point to the idea of the IGC originating from Giovanni Capellini as a result of his journeys in Europe and North America, especially through discussions with his French and Swiss friends. Capellini was the first titular chair of geology funded by the new-born Italian state in Bologna. European travels reinforced Capellini’s intention to create a great geological museum designed to store types and standards of fossils, rocks, lithic tools, and materials used for geological mapping, mining exploration, land planning, and improving agriculture. His long geological travel through North America in 1863 allowed Capellini to convey to many North American geologists his conviction that there was need for an international forum to reach a wide agreement on stratigraphy, palaeontology and mapping. During his 1863 trip, Capellini became a friend of three future members of the IGC founding committee and familiar with two others through common acquaintances. Perhaps, the Italian-French group of leading figures who first conceived of the IGC asked their North American colleagues to make a proposal from abroad. This same successful procedure of an ‘outside’ request was followed in founding the International Congress of Anthropology and pre-Historical Archaeology in 1865. The idea came from French scientists who confidentially asked Capellini to found the congress and suggested to hold the first session in Neuchâtel in 1866 and the second in Paris in 1867. This then may be the key to understanding why the first four IGCs were held in France, Italy, Germany, and UK before one took place in the USA where the IGC was founded.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.005 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".