Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Cheap SeatsA Note from the Editor Willie Steele I have no idea what the number of baseball games I've attended in my life might be. Some of my friends and colleagues would probably argue that it's too many, but I'm certain that it's not enough. Once the college season starts, it's not unusual for me to post a sign on my office door informing students I can be found behind home plate, slightly closer to the home dugout on the third base side, two rows back, and two seats over if they need to find me. Thankfully no student has ever had an issue so important that it took me away from a game. But the games I've enjoyed the most over the years are the ones I have had the opportunity to share with friends. This issue of NINE is the first one that is being co-edited by my friend David Pegram. I've known him for several years now, ever since I started attending the annual NINE Spring Training Conference in Tempe, Arizona. Even before we'd met, I knew he was good people because he was wearing a Pirates hat. Having David join the journal as the co-editor is not much different than enjoying a ballgame with a friend. We've gotten to talk through articles, debate the ways this issue will be organized, and discuss the topics each author covers. I'm confident the journal will be better with two of us working on it, and there is no one I can think of more suited for the role than David. We are excited about the material found in this issue of NINE. Joseph Stanton gets things started with his poetry about some of the iconic artwork housed at the Baseball Hall of Fame. If you've ever been there, you will know exactly what he's writing about. If you've not yet visited Cooperstown, Joe's poetry gives you one more reason to make the trip. We are continuing the Loved It/Loathed It feature with two opposing viewpoints of W. P. Kinsella's 1982 novel Shoeless Joe. You might note, however, that we've changed the feature's title to Love It/Leave It since the pieces in this section are never meant to pigeonhole an author into an "all or nothing" type of opinion about a certain baseball book. For reasons that are explained in my [End Page ix] "Love It" piece, I'd not yet read Clayton Trudor's "Leave It" submission when I wrote my thoughts down. No matter how tempted I'd been to ask David to send it to me, that piece remained a mystery to me until I submitted my thoughts on Kinsella's book. At our annual conference in 2023, we were honored to have Ron Rapoport speak about Jackie Robinson. As soon as his talk concluded, there were several people who said, "You need to get that in the journal. That's going to be something people remember for years." We were thrilled when Ron agreed to have us publish "Jackie Robinson Would Have Hated Jackie Robinson Day," which you will also find in the Triple Play section of this issue. Speaking of Jackie Robinson, previous contributor Peter Dreier returns to the journal with his examination of the complex (and often misunderstood) relationship between the Dodgers infielder and athlete-actor-activist Paul Robeson. Roberto Gonzalez Echevarria gives readers his memories of seeing some of the most iconic ballplayers of his youth play in Cuba during the 1950s. Largely based on his personal interviews with these players, Echevarria's article gives us a glimpse into a world often overlooked by baseball fans. And in an interesting combination of history, biography, and good, old fashioned detective work, Rhett Grametbauer introduces you to a baseball player from the World War II era, one not named Feller, DiMaggio, or Williams. In his piece you will learn the story of Johnny Lund and an old baseball that was the catalyst for this article. Sam Zygner and Emalee Nelson each provide a look back at baseball history with their articles about...
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) | 0.012 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".