MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965553210 · doi:10.1525/gfc.2019.19.3.96

Review: Pressure Cooker: Why Home Cooking Won't Solve Our Problems and What We Can Do about It, by Sarah Bowen, Joslyn Brenton, and Sinikka Elliott

2019· article· en· W2965553210 on OpenAlex
Josée Johnston

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGastronomica The Journal of Food and Culture · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCulinary Culture and Tourism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconCookerCitationDownloadSearch engine optimizationWorld Wide WebArt historyComputer scienceLibrary scienceArtHistorySearch engine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Book Review| August 01 2019 Review: Pressure Cooker: Why Home Cooking Won't Solve Our Problems and What We Can Do about It, by Sarah Bowen, Joslyn Brenton, and Sinikka Elliott Pressure Cooker: Why Home Cooking Won't Solve Our Problems and What We Can Do about ItSarah Bowen, Joslyn Brenton, and Sinikka ElliottNew York: Oxford University Press, 2019352 pp. $24.95 (hardcover) Josée Johnston Josée Johnston University of Toronto Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Gastronomica (2019) 19 (3): 96–97. https://doi.org/10.1525/gfc.2019.19.3.96 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Josée Johnston; Review: Pressure Cooker: Why Home Cooking Won't Solve Our Problems and What We Can Do about It, by Sarah Bowen, Joslyn Brenton, and Sinikka Elliott. Gastronomica 1 August 2019; 19 (3): 96–97. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/gfc.2019.19.3.96 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentGastronomica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2019 by the Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press's Reprints and Permissions web page, http://www.ucpress.edu/journals.php?p=reprints.2019 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.188 · 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