MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Becoming a Philosopher in Seventeenth-Century Britain

2013· book· en· W2668152479 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Serjeantson

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2013
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Philosophy and Science
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheismApologeticsNatural philosophyField (mathematics)EpistemologyPeriod (music)Natural (archaeology)PhilosophyClassicsReligious studiesHistoryAestheticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter, which examines what it meant to become a philosopher and work in the field of philosophy in Great Britain during the seventeenth century, analyzes the factors that influenced people to become philosophers and describes the circumstances in which they studied philosophy. It identifies a pattern by which the schools provided a preliminary framework for becoming a philosopher that later served as a creative foil for the pursuit of a philosophical career beyond the schools. The chapter also highlights the key developments during this period, which include the increasing prominence of (mono)theistic philosophical apologetics and the emergence of experimental natural philosophy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.013
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.150 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicHistorical Philosophy and ScienceFrench-language works237,207