Bibliographic record
Abstract
I have known James Carley for more than twenty years, after first running into him at Christ's College Cambridge, where he held a Visiting Fellowship, and I was (then) Chaplain and Director of Theological Studies.We became firm friends, and I later had the opportunity to visit him at Massey College, Toronto, since when our paths have kept crossing.This volume is another kind of crossing of paths, and in the short space that is granted me in this juncture, allows me to indulge in a handful of sidelong glances.James is foremost a historian.But his work is also shaped by what I would term 'engaging generosity'.The phrase is not common currency in academia; it is rare and valuable minting.But it is true of James on several counts: his interaction with colleagues; his engagement, and generous embeddedness in a wide range of universities in Canada, the USA, Great Britain and beyond, as well as in other bodies, such as the Worshipful Company of Barbers.It is my experience that wherever James engages, it is in the nature of his practice and character to seek out and encourage students and colleagues in whom he then invests encouragement, mentoring and cordial (yet critical) academic engagement-all done in a spirit of generosity.James Carley's work is also marked by that restless spirit of enquiry and openness that drives all great scholars.James is a most remarkable scholar.Not just clever or brilliant, he is wise.And the growth of wisdom-as a character, virtue and intellectual practice-can only be formed by the fusions of tensions that take place within our academic journeys.Humility must be present, for we cannot know everything-and we always stand to be corrected.But there must be courage too.The wise scholar must be willing to explore new ideas that others might have treated as alien (or even profane).Sometimes the ideas and disciplines that we have loved and cherished must be set aside or transcended, in the cause of the search for new knowledge.James's historical work is characterized by an appreciative, generous, orthodox, and adventurous spirit-as much as it is tempered by the kind of exemplary caution of the historian,
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".