MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406333355 · doi:10.1017/s0075435824000364

The Problem(s) of Empire

2024· article· en· W4406333355 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carlos F. Noreña

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Roman Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonialism, slavery, and trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpireHistoryArtAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oxford University Press is the largest university press in the world. It has been in continuous operation since 1586, making it the second oldest university press after Cambridge University Press (1534). From its imposing complex in Jericho, the stylish suburb of Oxford, and its many satellite offices around the world, including Delhi, Chennai, Kolkata, Karachi, Hong Kong, Cape Town, Nairobi, Dar es Salaam, Melbourne, Toronto and New York — the overlap with former territories of the British Empire is conspicuous — it produces an unparalleled number of academic publications every year and occupies a dominant position in the authentication of knowledge and its dissemination across the globe. In 2022–23, for example, the press published no fewer than 1,777 new academic titles, available in 193 countries and translated into 45 languages (including Somali and Quechua, as the press's 2022–23 Annual Report breathlessly announces). And revenues are substantial: £825,000,000 in sales last year alone. A bastion of prestige, global in reach but with a clear centre, and sitting comfortably within the inner citadel of a hierarchical, worldwide ecosystem of knowledge-making, Oxford University Press can be seen as a quasi-imperial operation in its own right.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.066
Scholarly communication0.0110.020
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0060.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Roman StudiesSame topicColonialism, slavery, and tradeFrench-language works237,207