Bibliographic record
Abstract
ace I first met Ludwig Grunberg in 1983 in Montreal at the World Congress of Philosophy.He was perfectly at home in the Francophone culture.We participated in the program organized by John Somerville and Ronald Santoni for International Philosophers for the Prevention of Nuclear Omnicide (IPPNO).Everyone at these sessions spoke on behalf of peace and thereby recognized one another as peace-lovers.After the Congress, Grunberg initiated regular correspondence with me from Bucharest.His letters, graceful and gracious, though at times guarded, were another opportunity for him to engage in philosophical activities outside the closed world of Romania.For almost his entire professional life, he remained a solitary thinker in a remote and restricted outpost of the mind, while participating as an active member of the cosmopolitan community of scholars."We live in a strange world," he wrote one New Year's eve, "but we are not strangers."He was to repeat this observationand this commitmentyears afterward.Another time he wrote, "We try, together (in spite of distance, space, and time) to make life better."And again, "Let's hope in the 'world of values'!" Another time, "Let us hope in the power of philosophy."Yet again: "Where there is a will there is a way.And a hope too."After being prevented by Romanian restrictions from going to Nairobi to give his invited paper on philosophy of values at the Extraordinary World Congress of Philosophy, he wrote, on 1 August 1991, of future opportunities, "Let's hope again.As Bacon told us, hope is always a good breakfast, but it is a bad supper."Grunberg took keen interest in international activities involving philosophy of values, especially the Journal of Value Inquiry and the American Society for Value Inquiry (ASVI).From his distant yet far-seeing perspective, he had striking insights about the role, the value, and the development of such activities.On 3 May 1984, he sent an extensive letter to me with this historic proposal: I dare, finally, to suggest youas Vice-President of the ASVI (where I am an old member) ... develop the co-[ operation] between American and European researchers in axiology.As you know, our ASVI is the unique society for value inquiry in all over the world; the ASVI has to do the first step for the building of a possible and desirable International Society for Value Inquiry (ISVI)].
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.460 | 0.309 |
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".