MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Misplaced Memory

2023· book-chapter· en· W4386971562 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tom Wilber

Bibliographic record

VenueCornell University Press eBooks · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMaritime and Coastal Archaeology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperHistoryRecreationCrewGenealogyArt historyPsychologyMedia studiesSociologyArchaeologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter recounts the author's visit to the Charles Himes cottage, focused on finding correspondence and photos from the crew's families. Reference to these in newspaper accounts from 1944 had hinted at what the families had endured—or in one instance failed to endure—as the grand hope of their boys being found alive succumbed to the modest expectation that their bodies would be recovered. The chapter emphasizes that it is difficult to conjure events that have drifted to the fringes of conscious memory or pay homage to a tomb that can't be found. Yet, as the chapter argues, it is safe to say that in 1944, the memory of Gertie's crew was painfully fresh and diligently tended by mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, their grief anchored to a uniquely human compulsion to know how and where things came to an end, and lay to rest the bodies of their loved ones. Nearly eighty years later, the story of Gertie waits to be made whole. The chapter considers the exhaustive administrative process for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Lake Ontario Marine Sanctuary. The sanctuary designation, would, according to the final assessment from NOAA, “provide a national stage for promoting heritage tourism and recreation” and “ensure future generations can learn about and explore these underwater treasures.”

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0140.032
Scholarly communication0.0150.024
Open science0.0030.015
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.006

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.109 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCornell University Press eBooksSame topicMaritime and Coastal ArchaeologyFrench-language works237,207