The Age of Uncertainties: Why (?) is it so Difficult to Understand?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unannounced emergence of Covid19 has created chaos to the entire world, with none were left unaffected by this unseen but lethal microorganism.No one would have thought in this 21st century, humankind regardless of nationality, races, religious beliefs, etc. would have to go through a war with the unseen.In this trying time, one thing becomes apparent, it is important how we interpret things that happened around us.Schools and university are closed.Businesses are suspended.The debate about how people are going to survive in the next few months seems to reach no end as no one is prepared for this circumstance.Reflecting from my doctoral student research work, I elucidate the ways in which I try to understand participants' worldview through phenomenological design and link it with what is currently happening in the world through Husserl Transcendental Phenomenology and Heidegger Hermeneutics Phenomenology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.032 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".