MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794201136 · doi:10.17351/ests2018.224

Images of Marie Curie: How Reputational Entrepreneurs Shape Iconic Identities

2018· article· en· W2794201136 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEngaging Science Technology and Society · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarie curieHonorReputationCurieAdmirationBiographySociologyWifeLawPolitical scienceSocial scienceCurie temperaturePsychologyCondensed matter physicsSocial psychologyPhysicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marie Curie holds iconic status both within the scientific community and in the wider cultural imagination and collective memory. The first woman to be awarded a Nobel Prize and the only woman to achieve such an honor twice, Curie is widely celebrated as a female pioneer in the sciences and is held up as a model for all, but particularly women, to emulate. She is revered not only as a ground-breaking scientist, but also as a devoted wife and mother who fostered intellectual passion in her own children, one of whom became the second woman to be honored with the Nobel Prize in Science. Echoing Eva Hemmungs Wirten, we argue that the evolution of Curie’s status over time offers an opportunity to use meta-biography to understand the layered nature of her reputation. We draw on Gary Alan Fine’s theory of reputational entrepreneurship to understand her legacy as a product of collective historical memory. Curie’s legacy was not pre-determined by the fact that she was a successful scientist; in fact, she was shunned by the public in France in 1911 after it was revealed that she, a widow, had engaged in an affair with a fellow married scientist. A meta-biographical analysis reveals considerable effort was put into reputation building by her Curie herself, her commercial sponsor, and family members. To ignore the earlier iterations of her reputation is to underestimate the challenges she faced as a woman in male-dominated science and in a society that judged her by a sexual double standard. Meta-biography, in conjunction with theories of intellectual reputation building and collective memory, allows us to unearth the complicated layers of Curie’s story. It also tells us a great deal about the [sexist] society in which Curie and her supporters had to forge her reputation.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaScience and technology studies
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Qualitativelow
gptScience and technology studies
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Qualitativelow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.289 · 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