MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782618301 · doi:10.1017/s0021875817001517

Karen R. Jones , Epiphany in the Wilderness: Hunting, Nature, and Performance in the Nineteenth-Century American West (Boulder: University Press of Colorado, 2015, $55.00). Pp. xiii + 363. <scp>isbn</scp> 978 1 6073 2397 6.

2018· article· en· W2782618301 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Bold

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArchaeology and Natural History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildernessAmerican westEpiphanyEnvironmental ethicsWest virginiaHistoryArt historyArtArchaeologyEthnologyPhilosophyEcologyVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Karen R. Jones , Epiphany in the Wilderness: Hunting, Nature, and Performance in the Nineteenth-Century American West (Boulder: University Press of Colorado, 2015, $55.00). Pp. xiii + 363. isbn 978 1 6073 2397 6. - Volume 52 Issue 1

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.026

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.278 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of American StudiesSame topicArchaeology and Natural HistoryFrench-language works237,207