MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242295229 · doi:10.1057/9780230226203.3644

Tarshis, Lorie (born 1911)

2011· reference-entry· en· W4242295229 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D.E. Moggridge

Bibliographic record

VenueThe New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics · 2011
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHistory and Developments in Astronomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tarshis was born in Toronto, Canada on 22 March 1911. After a commerce degree at the University of Toronto, he went to Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took a BA in 1934 and a PhD in 1939. His years in Cambridge, 1932–6, which coincided with the emergence of Keynes’s General Theory, shaped much of his subsequent professional life. His notes for Keynes’s annual series of eight lectures on his work in progress for the years 1932–5 have become an important source for those interested in tracing the evolution of Keynes’s views. The two Cambridge revolutions of the 1930s, Keynes’s and imperfect competition, focused the analysis of his PhD dissertation, ‘The Distribution of Labour Income’. From this came two classic articles in 1938 and 1939 which, along with a contemporaneous piece by John Dunlop (1938), forced Keynes to reconsider his generalization that real and money wages moved inversely over the trade cycle and its implications for the assumption of perfect competition that underlay the analysis of the book (Keynes 1939). These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.011

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe New Palgrave Dictionary of EconomicsSame topicHistory and Developments in AstronomyFrench-language works237,207