MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235842094 · doi:10.1353/bcc.2005.0095

So You Want to Be an Explorer? (review)

2005· article· en· W4235842094 on OpenAlex
Elizabeth Bush

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the Center for Children's Books./Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace exploration and regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorge (robot)GlobeArt historyHistoryArtPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: So You Want to Be an Explorer? Elizabeth Bush St. George, Judith So You Want to Be an Explorer?; illus. by David Small. Philomel, 2005 [56p] ISBN 0-399-23868-9$16.99 Reviewed from galleys Ad Gr. 3-5 If President (BCCB 7/00) isn't exciting enough, and Inventor (BCCB 10/02) is too sedentary, St. George and Small offer readers a third career option in their now familiar series: consider the life of an explorer. There are explorers who "tackle a quest with gusto," such as Alexander the Great and Thor Heyerdahl; there are risk takers, such as mountain climber Barbara Washburn and test pilot Chuck Yeager. Some focus on firsts: circumnavigating the globe by spacecraft (Yuri Gagarin) or on foot (David Kunst—but how he crossed the oceans is left a mystery). Others find fame in failure: Ernest Shackleton's Antarctic near-misses, and Amelia Earhart's mid-flight disappearance. St. George encourages readers to think broadly about what constitutes exploration, including not only the big names in earth, sea, and space travel, but also Francis Collins and Craig Venter, "who decoded the human DNA 'letters' in 2000." A collection like this really needs the background knowledge of Presidents to work most effectively; without it, the result is ultimately an enticing [End Page 115] but disjointed collection of underexplained trivia. Information flies by at warp speed, and claims that aren't adequately nuanced will raise some questions: was the Kon-Tiki voyage really "proof positive" that "Westerns could have sailed from Peru to Polynesia thousands of years ago? How did the northerly Inuit manage to help Roald Amundsen on his trip to the South Pole? Nonetheless, St. George and Small have their audience pegged—kids thirsty for lightning-fast factoids accompanied by high energy, comical caricatures that refuse to treat must-know personages with the textbook reverence they generally enjoy. Report writers can cull the glossary for topic tips if they must, but expect this to find its real berth with the casual page-thumbers. Copyright © 2005 The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.222 · 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