Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sundials, sundial societies, sundial registries, and sundial trails can be found throughout Europe in Austria, Britain, Spain, France, Hungary, Italy, England, Scotland, Israel, Turkey, the Netherlands, Quebec, and Switzerland, as well as in North America. I have been unable to locate a sundial society in Argentina, or generally in South America. After extensive research, I have found just a smattering of sundials. Why might this be? Though sundials have been built beyond the time when they were required, the concentration of societies and dials in Europe indicates that in areas where they were historically studied and developed — and in some cases have monumental status — they became embedded in the culture and consciousness. Because of a lack of sundial history, and as nineteenth-century European immigrants would not have needed to bring sundials on their journey, it is unsurprising that sundials are rare and sundial societies non-existent in Argentina. Having found one in San Juan, Argentina (-31° 31’ 09’’ S, 68° 32’ 47’’ W), though it has a number of design flaws, I thought it worthwhile to note it for its uniqueness and connection with Argentine history.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".