MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001047281 · doi:10.12775/setf.2020.011

Review of Creative Nature (part 2)

2020· article· fr· W3001047281 on OpenAlexaff
Geoffrey Woollard, John G. Brungardt

Bibliographic record

VenueScientia et Fides · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Philosophy and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpistemologyBridge (graph theory)PhilosophyRelation (database)Sociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The short monograph Creative Nature (Francisco Javier Novo, Rubén Pereda, and Javier Sánchez-Cañizares. 2018. Naturaleza Creativa. Madrid: Rialp. ISBN: 978-84-321-4916-0. 196 pp. Paperback, €14.25) is a welcome contribution to the philosophy of nature that arose from interdisciplinary conversations between authors who are both up-to-date in the scientific literature and deeply grounded in the western intellectual tradition. In this second part of our review essay, we offer three themes for further reflection: (1) seeing the whole: synergy between philosophy of nature and empirical studies, (2) boundary questions: philosophy of nature as a mediator of dialogue between science and religion, and (3) whether the book helps defend a natural philosophy of form and finality. In conclusion, we recommend this book as a way to bridge science and philosophy and as a point of departure for theological reflection.The short monograph Creative Nature (Francisco Javier Novo, Rubén Pereda, and Javier Sánchez-Cañizares. 2018. Naturaleza Creativa. Madrid: Rialp. ISBN: 978-84-321-4916-0. 196 pp. Paperback, €14.25) is a welcome contribution to the philosophy of nature that arose from interdisciplinary conversations between authors who are both up-to-date in the scientific literature and deeply grounded in the western intellectual tradition. In this second part of our review essay, we offer three themes for further reflection: (1) seeing the whole: synergy between philosophy of nature and empirical studies, (2) boundary questions: philosophy of nature as a mediator of dialogue between science and religion, and (3) whether the book helps defend a natural philosophy of form and finality. In conclusion, we recommend this book as a way to bridge science and philosophy and as a point of departure for theological reflection.

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)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.005

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientia et FidesSame topicEnvironmental Philosophy and EthicsFrench-language works237,207