Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper is a first-person account of Professor Robert F. Lusch’s early academic career at the University of Oklahoma during the late 1970s and early 1980s by one of his earliest students. The author describes and reflects on what some might consider a tumultuous period in marketing’s disciplinary evolution and suggests how these early years might in fact inform us of Professor Lusch’s later prolific contributions and deep impact on our discipline. Though perhaps more known for his uniquely critical thinking and his seminal contributions to the foundational elements of marketing, the author also tries to shine a light on Bob Lusch as a dedicated teacher, a tireless mentor and as a peerless educator—whose genuine care and friendship to his students knew no bounds. Though on this occasion his passing saddens us as he left us too early, the legacy of this exceptional scholar and educator will always be fondly remembered by his students and friends and will have a profound impact on all future students of marketing.
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 | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.037 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".