Bibliographic record
Abstract
Editors’ Introduction Elizabeth S. Radcliffe and Mark G. Spencer We are pleased to say that Hume Studies has awarded its second annual Essay Prize, with an announcement featured in this issue. The winning paper will be published in November 2023 (Hume Studies 48:2). We thank the members of the 2022–23 Prize Committee, who are acknowledged in the announcement. Please see the Call for Papers for the Third Annual Essay Prize on page 189 of this issue. Along with five original articles and three book reviews, our current issue features a symposium on Margaret Watkins’s book, The Philosophical Progress of Hume’s “Essays” (Cambridge University Press, 2019). The symposium is a development from an Author-Meets-Critics panel that was held at the 47th Hume Society Conference, sponsored by the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana in Bogotá, Columbia, July 2021. We thank the organizers and the panelists. With the end of 2022, we have had a changing of the guard among the Hume Studies Editorial Board. The Hume Society Constitution allows that Editorial Board members can serve no more than two consecutive 6-year terms. Consequently, we have had to say farewell to Helen Beebee, Don Garrett, and James Harris. We are grateful for their many years of fine service to the journal. Lisa Shapiro’s appointment has been renewed for another term. We are pleased to welcome new members to the Editorial Board: James Fieser (University of Tennessee at Martin), Peter S. Fosl (Transylvania University), and Ruth Weintraub (Tel Aviv University). We also bring to your attention the Call for Papers for the 50th annual Hume Society Conference, to be held at Oxford University in the summer of 2024. The conference planners hope to present an exceptional program for this golden jubilee. Please check out their “Call” on page 191 of this issue for information about the conference themes and the submission deadline. Finally, we remind our readers that we are always looking for excellent submissions at Hume Studies. We usually get referee reports to authors in about eight weeks’ [End Page 5] time, and time to publication after acceptance is approximately one year. Our issues are online in April and November at three websites: the Hume Society (for members, https://www.humesociety.org), Project Muse (https://muse.jhu.edu), and the Philosophy Documentation Center (https://www.pdcnet.org). Paper issues arrive at U.S. locations by mail just a few weeks later. International mailing takes several weeks longer. Information on submitting a paper to our online portal can be found here: https://www.humesociety.org/ojs/index.php/hs/information/authors. In the case of technical difficulties, please contact one of the editors. [End Page 6] Copyright © 2023 Hume Studies
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 | 0.007 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.344 | 0.274 |
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".