MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891499750

The day I should have died

2017· article· en· W2891499750 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dan Swanson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe New Scientist · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMountVolcanoGeologyMorningArchaeologyMeteorologySeismologyGeographyEngineeringAstronomy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stock details how volcanologist Don Swanson's life changed in the Mount St Helens eruption of 1980. At 8:32 am on 18 May 1980, Mount St Helens erupted. He was about 70 kilometers away in Vancouver, Washington, watching the seismograph, when the instruments started showing major activity. He ran to the radio to call Dave Johnston, his colleague in a field station at the volcano. There was no reply. He didn't grasp the scale of the eruption until he was flying over it later that morning. The top of the mountain simply wasn't there, replaced instead by a huge column of ash.

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)0.022
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0060.020
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0930.060

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 head0.600
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.082 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe New ScientistSame topicClimate Change Communication and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207