Tachtigers in de wetenschap. Een nieuwe kijk op het ontstaan van de 'Tweede Gouden Eeuw' in de Nederlandse natuurwetenschap
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dutch science underwent a spectacular development in the last quarter of the nineteenth century, resulting in the so-called ¿Second Golden Age¿ of Dutch science. In historiography the successes of Dutch science are traditionally mainly attributed to educational reforms that should have considerably improved the circumstances under which scientific research was done at the universities. In this study this ¿institutional¿ view is criticised as being too narrow and even erroneous. For an explanation of the successes of Dutch science, one needs instead to look at the profound social changes that took place in Dutch society. The ¿unsuccessful¿ scientists of the first half of the century reflect in their scientific activities the values of the static Dutch class society. The successful ¿pioneers of the Second Golden Age¿ on the other hand, show the same spirit of innovation and individualism that is typical of Dutch culture in the last quarter of the nineteenth century.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".