Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract When judged by its impact on human life and happiness, the discovery of insulin was perhaps the most momentous event in the history of modern science. Up to the third decade of the twentieth century a diagnosis of dia betesߞwhich an alert doctor could often make from the white spots of dried sugar that bespattered a male patient’s shoes or trouser bottomsߞpresaged an early and miserable death. This could be delayed only by a starvation diet, no less agonizing for most patients than the disease. The road to insulin was beset by misadventure, rancour, and deceit. The award of a Nobel Prize in 1923 to two of the principal actors, Frederick Banting (1891-1941) and John Macleod (1876-1935), inflamed several others, who felt (with some justice) that their efforts had been disparaged or forgotten. One of these was Nicolas Paulesco, a Romanian physiologist, who made the critical observation that linked diabetes to the dearth of an active component in the pancreas: he discovered that high levels of sugar in the blood and urine of dogs, rendered diabetic by extirpation of the pancreas, fell when the animals were injected with pancreatic extracts. Paulesco’s work was interrupted for four years by the Austro-Hungarian invasion of his country before the end of the First World War, and by the time he returned to the problem Banting, Macleod, Best, and Collip in Toronto were closing in on their quarry.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".