Bibliographic record
Abstract
Please note that editorial foreword does not include an abstract. Foreword Volume 4 of Aestimatio brings with it several important changes that our readers may well want to take note of. To begin, we will no longer publish the two issues of a volume when each is complete. From now on, the items constituting the volume for a given year will be put online as they are ready. This will entail some minor changes in our website (https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/aestimatio). But, so far as our readers are concerned, we anticipate in the neighborhood of 22 items per volume. Next, we have just about completed the installation of the submission module that comes with Open Journal System that we use for putting the journal online. Since we already have much of the contents of volume 4 in hand, this volume will be a hybrid, effectively giving us time to test the module. We will let you know when the module is fully operational. For volume 5, we will require that all contributions to Aestimatio be made using this module. As you might expect, the implementation and management of the module and, more generally, of Aestimatio is a challenging and time-consuming task, and so we are delighted that Olivier Séguin-Brault, a graduate student in French literature of the 16th century at the Université du Québec à Rimouski / Université de Tours (UQAR/CESR), has agreed to join us as our new Managing Editor. He will be working with our OJS Manager, Hossein Gholizadeh, to facilitate the online operation of the journal. Olivier will also help us by translating our OJS website into French, so that users will have the choice of accessing the site in French or English. This will be an important step in our ongoing effort to publicize Aestimatio, that is, to make your contributions more accessible. To the same end, once this stage of work on the site itself is finished, we will establish accounts in various of the social media to be used for distributing announcements and notifications concerning Aestimatio and its publisher, the IRCPS. Finally, in accordance with the changes in our model for publication, we will no longer have special issues; indeed, there will no longer be issues, only volumes. Accordingly, instead of the special issues, when we have the content, we will create a section of the volume at hand that is devoted to a single topic and edited by guest editor. As before, we warmly encourage our readers to organize and submit plans for these focal sections. Alan C. Bowen and Francesca Rochbergbowen@IRCPS.orgfrochberg@gmail.com How to cite: Bowen, A. C., and Rochberg , F. From the Editors. Aestimatio: Sources and Studies in the History of Science (2023) 4: vii–viii. https://doi.org/10.33137/aestimatio.v4.43006
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 | 0.003 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.445 | 0.472 |
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".