MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768156662 · doi:10.11647/obp.0122.02

2. New Technology and the Mapping of Empire: The Adoption of the Astrolabe

2017· book-chapter· en· W2768156662 on OpenAlexfundno aff
А.А. Голубинский

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Book Publishers · 2017
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistory of Science and Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of CambridgeLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsAstrolabeEmpireGeographyArchaeologyAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This piece considers the next phase of imperial map-making from the mid-18th century as an official enterprise, using scientific methods and instruments. This was an era in which Russia – and the entirety of Europe, for that matter – was caught up in a fascination with science. This new scientific age meant that the role of Russia in international affairs became more pronounced, and the representation of Russian territories became increasingly important for geographers both in Russia and abroad. The central episode, symbolically and practically, was the systematic import, and then local manufacture, of astrolabes.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Book PublishersSame topicHistory of Science and MedicineFrench-language works237,207