MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915236755 · doi:10.1080/0361526x.2017.1300470

Empire Redefined: Part 2

2017· article· en· W2915236755 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

VenueThe Serials Librarian · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian History and Society
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsPublishingDecolonizationEmpireRevenueProfit (economics)Economic historyPolitical scienceHistoryEconomyEconomicsAncient historyLawNeoclassical economicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dutch empires in publishing and territorial colonization are examined and compared during the 19th and 20th centuries for their relevancy to today. As decolonization took hold around the world, the Dutch divested geopolitical control of their colonies. At the same time, science publishing emerged from a precarious financial footing to one of solid revenue, profit, and unrestrained growth. Part 2 continues the story of two Dutch legacies and their impact on our current times.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.238 · 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