MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621066624 · doi:10.1111/hic3.12389

Isaac Newton, scholar: An exceptional example of normal erudition

2017· article· en· W2621066624 on OpenAlex
Paul Greenham

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHistory Compass · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Philosophy and Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAzrieli Foundation
KeywordsScholarshipContext (archaeology)AlchemyNatural philosophySubject (documents)EpistemologyHumanismNatural (archaeology)History of scienceClassicsPhilosophyLiteratureHistoryArt historyArtLawComputer scienceLibrary scienceTheologyArchaeologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Isaac Newton remains a subject of primary interest in the history of science, as recent scholarship redefines our understanding of the boundaries between disciplines of knowing in the early modern world. Newton's alchemy—or chymistry—together with his interpretations of chronology and biblical prophecy continue to be debated in their relationship to his innovations in science—or natural philosophy. This article reviews the recent shifts of this debate to a focus on Newton's erudition, to how Newton employed the tools of the university‐educated scholar, both humanist and scholastic, in his search for truth within his various intellectual pursuits. Newton's massive legacy of remaining source documents provides rich insight into what was, in many ways, a form of scholarship quite common in his historical context.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.094 · 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