MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

B. Franklin Royer:

2014· article· en· W238565414 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jim Higgins

Bibliographic record

VenuePennsylvania History A Journal of Mid-Atlantic Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommonwealthState (computer science)Public healthPoliticsBlindnessHistoriographyHistoryHealth departmentPolitical scienceEconomic historyLawPublic administrationMedicineOptometryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Pennsylvania is often regarded in the historiography of public health, medicine, urban, and industrial history as little more than a disaster; her chief cities, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, highlighted the health disparity between rich and poor, their tenements among the most degraded in the nation, their water poisonous, and their skies leaden. The plight of the state's city dwellers were exceeded in misery and mortality rates only by the wretched conditions of the coal patches, small steel towns, and timber camps that dotted the Commonwealth. By the turn of the twentieth century enough political will was mustered to overcome objections to a state department of health. Benjamin Franklin Royer emerged from the public health apparatus of Philadelphia to assume a critical role in the department, eventually rising to its head and guiding the state through the influenza pandemic of 1918. In the early 1920s, after a titanic explosion leveled most of Halifax, Nova Scotia, Royer took the lessons he learned in the state and rebuilt Halifax, starting the first public health nursing program in Canada. Between 1926 and 1932 he was medical director of the National Society for the Prevention of Blindness where he led a campaign against bacteria-induced blindness in newborns and adolescents before returning to Pennsylvania to work on antiblindness and tuberculosis control efforts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePennsylvania History A Journal of Mid-Atlantic StudiesSame topicPublic Health Policies and EducationFrench-language works237,207