Island Studies Journal 5(1), Book Reviews
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The publishers claim that this book is "a comprehensive, complete and authoritative reference dealing with all of the physical and biological aspects of islands and island habitats."They are probably not too far off the mark.The Encyclopedia of Islands is not "complete" if one takes the word to mean "containing everything there is to know about islands" and it is concerned mainly with natural as opposed to social science; but it is certainly comprehensive and it has been put together by a star-studded cast of authorities.The book contains 236 articles written by 302 people from all over the world.I have no idea what the global distribution of island scientists is.One hundred and twenty four of the contributors have an address in the USA, 28 in the UK, 16 in Australia, three in the Faroes and one in Switzerland.This probably reflects fairly the geographical spread of relevant expertise; it is certainly much more catholic than many multi-author volumes.And an outrageously prejudiced last word: if you look up the Encyclopedia of Islands on Amazon, you will find that, those who bought it, also bought Islands by R.J. Berry.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.089 | 0.036 |
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".