Bibliographic record
Abstract
When the government of Venice produced the first handwritten newspaper Notizie Scritte in 1556, it was in response to the need to convey news on the economic, political and military affairs of the state in a quick and efficient manner. Long before this period, the Chinese were already using handwritten messages on silk to transmit information on the affairs of the state to government officials on a daily basis although this took time to produce, transmit and read, and lacked the desired quickness and efficiency of information dissemination. By 1582 China had began to publish newssheets for private broadcasts in and around Beijing. Gradually, the idea of the newspaper as a source of daily news for the public’s digestion spread beyond China to other parts of Asia, even as it became widely adopted in Europe. The newspaper became popular when Johann Carolus published what has been recognized as the first modern era newspaper in 1605 in Strasbourg, then an independent imperial city in Germany and which is now in France. In no time, newspapers became adopted in Germany (1609), the Netherlands (1618), England (1620), France (1631) and Sweden (1645). The latter still publishes its first newspaper, Oprechte Haerlemse Courant , in an electronic format online. Stateside, the American population was not to get a taste of the newspaper until 1690 when Benjamin Harris published Publick Occurrences Both Forreign and Domestick and subsequently The Boston News-Letter in 1704 (Figure 5.1) which became the first continuously published newspaper in the US. Canada followed suit with the Halifax Gazette in 1751. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.095 | 0.035 |
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".