MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043999566 · doi:10.1159/000507991

The Duels of Pierre Marie and Jules Dejerine

2020· article· en· W3043999566 on OpenAlex
Hélio Afonso Ghizoni Teive, Matheus Gomes Ferreira, Carlos Henrique Ferreira Camargo, Renato P. Munhoz, Olivier Walusinski

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

VenueEuropean Neurology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In no country has the duel prevailed to such a great extent as in France where the matter of dueling and affairs of honor were of frequent occurrence until the 20th century. The term duel has since been established for any contest between 2 persons or parties, be they sporting, intellectual, political, or in other matters. Despite their worldwide recognition and great scientific production, Pierre Marie and Jules Dejerine became rivals at the end of the 19th century. While Marie defended Charcot's neurological school at Salpêtrière Hospital, Dejerine had his own neurology school to contend. The fierce antagonism between them materialized to the verge of a real death duel in 1892 and later to an intellectual duel in the famous debate about aphasias, held in Paris in 1908.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.185 · 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