MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333080006 · doi:10.4310/iccm.2014.v2.n1.a14

Raoul Bott at Harvard

2014· article· en· W2333080006 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shing–Tung Yau, Steve Nadis

Bibliographic record

VenueNotices of the International Consortium of Chinese Mathematicians · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy and History of Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hiring of Raoul Bott also paid off immensely for Harvard, although it is fair to say that as a young man, Bott did not exhibit great mathematical flair, nor did he show much academic promise in general.Born in Budapest in 1923-and raised mainly in Slovakia (until his family immigrated to Canada in 1938)-Bott was, at best, a mediocre student throughout childhood.In five years of schooling in Bratislava, Slovakia, he did not earn a single A, except in singing and German.In mathematics, he typically got Cs and the occasional B, which should make him a hero among late bloomers.As a youth of about twelve to fourteen, Bott and a friend had fun playing around with electricity-creating sparks, wiring together fuse boxes, transformers, and vacuum tubes, and, in the process, figuring out how various gadgets work.This experimentation eventually served him well.A mathematician, Bott later explained, is "someone who likes to get to the root of things." 1 Although Bott frequently told his Harvard students that he never would have made it into the school as an undergraduate, he somehow managed to get into McGill University, where he majored in electrical engineering.2 Upon graduating in 1945, he joined the Canadian army but left after four months

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.625

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1870.097

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNotices of the International Consortium of Chinese MathematiciansSame topicPhilosophy and History of ScienceFrench-language works237,207