MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199007120 · doi:10.1080/17581206.2021.1967103

Eight weeks in North America

2020· article· en· W3199007120 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael R. Bailey

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for the History of Engineering & Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStudioPortraitContext (archaeology)Art historyBridge (graph theory)PhotographyHistoryMedia studiesVisual artsArtSociologyArchaeologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1853, Robert Stephenson (1803–1859) travelled to North America, principally in connection with the design and construction planning of the Victoria Bridge across the River St. Lawrence at Montreal for which he was the Consulting Engineer. He travelled via New York in both directions, and apparently on his return journey, he took time off to visit the studios of the Meade brothers, Henry and Charles, to have a daguerreotype portrait taken of himself. The image was seemingly privately owned until it was acquired by Bill Becker, proprietor of the American Museum of Photography, in 2017. The author was consulted about the image and confirmed that it was indeed that of Stephenson. The image has now been acquired by Mark Andrews (Member) of Toronto, who has kindly agreed to its publication, for the first time, in the International Journal. To accompany its publication, the background story of the eight weeks Stephenson spent in the United States and Canada has been researched, to set the context for his visit and the photograph.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0470.007

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueInternational Journal for the History of Engineering & TechnologySame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207