Bibliographic record
Abstract
Six months have rolled by like a blink of the geologic eye. This simile is translatable into a good Fermi problem involving units of time and proportional reasoning. As the reader will note the journal has moved from 2 to 3 issues a year, a simple arithmetical incremental for various reasons. Submissions to the journal have steadily increased. About a year or so ago, in my editorial in vol4.no2 [June 2007], I reported receipt of 86 manuscripts in 16 months. In the ensuing 12 months the journal received 107 submissions including several from angle trisectors, circle squarers and relativity debunkers, and 10 or so manuscripts in advanced pure mathematics that were beyond the scope of the journal. Sieving these submissions aside, the journal is averaging 90 manuscripts a year, with an acceptance rate of ~30%. The increase in the flow of manuscripts has created a severe backlog of articles necessitating an increase in frequency of issues per year. Henceforth the journal will move to 3 issues per year, one double issue and one normal issue per volume.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".