Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Biblical Preacher says that there is no end of making books, and that study is a weariness to the flesh.True as that may be, some of the experiences involved amply justify the scholar's suffering.In the course of his struggles he makes new friends and enhances his appreciation of old ones, so that prefaces such as this become testaments of gratitude, I begin with Charles Davis, who gave me the idea for the book when he was delivering a paper on a related topic at Saskatoon in 1978.A little later he, Harold Johnson, Larry Haworth, and Terence Penelhum helped me to arrange for a leave fellowship, to get the work done.Later, Professor Penelhum added helpful suggestions about the work in progress.My colleagues at the University of Waterloo provided a congenial environment for scholarly work, and Bill Abbott, in particular, was always helpful when I was finding my way into new areas of Philosophy.Jean Home, with her research skills in History, helped me with Chapter 3, and provided that devotion that wives are always thanked for in prefaces.John Bowker, at the University of Lancaster, contributed hospitality and reassuring discussion at a time when
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.545 | 0.338 |
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".