Bibliographic record
Abstract
This year marks the 350th anniversary of the creation of the first scientific journal, the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. At the beginning of the 19th century, journals became the fastest and most convenient way of disseminating new research results, outranking correspondence and monographs with which they had happily coexisted until then. They consolidated this position throughout the 20th Century, especially in the sciences. The advent of the digital era then challenged their traditional role and form. Indeed, digital technologies, which are easy to update, reuse, access, and transmit, have changed how researchers produce and disseminate knowledge, as well as how this knowledge is accessed, used, and cited. Drawing on historical and contemporary empirical data, this talk will address the past and current transformations of scholarly communication, with an emphasis on how these transformations have affected the speed at which knowledge is disseminated. While conventional wisdom suggests that science and scholarship now gets diffused—and forgotten—faster, the reality is more complex…and much more interesting.Cette année marque le 350e anniversaire de la création de la première revuescientifique, les Philosophical Transactions de la Royal Society de Londres. Au début du 19e siècle, les revues sont devenues le moyen le plus rapide et le plus pratique de diffuser les nouveaux résultats de recherche, dépassant la correspondance et les monographies avec lesquelles elles avaient coexisté sans problèmes jusqu’alors. Elles consolidèrent cette position tout au long du 20e siècle, en particulier dans les sciences. L’avènement de l’ère numérique a par la suite disputé leur rôle et leur forme traditionnels. En effet, les technologies numériques, qui sont faciles d’accès, simples à mettre à jour, à réutiliser et à transmettre, ont changé la façon dont les chercheurs produisent et diffusent les connaissances, ainsi que la façon dont ces connaissances sont atteintes, utilisées et citées. En puisant dans des données empiriques historiques et contemporaines, cette conférence abordera les transformations passées et actuelles de la communication scientifique, en mettant l’accent sur la façon dont ces transformations ont affecté la vitesse à laquelle les connaissances sont diffusées. Alors que la sagesse conventionnelle suggère que la science et l’érudition sont maintenant diffusées – et oubliées – plus rapidement, la réalité est plus complexe… et beaucoup plus intéressante.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.033 | 0.126 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.039 | 0.047 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".