Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This introductory essay surveys connections and lacunae in scholarship that has focused on non-human, interspecies, and multispecies histories within the history of natural historical, biological, and environmental sciences from the early modern period through the present era of climate crisis, highlighting the omnipresent influence of Harriet Ritvo’s foundational work. Beginning with a reflection on Charles Darwin’s predilection for dogs as opposed to cats, the essay points to chronological and thematic commonalities among the five other contributions to this special issue on the role of animals in shaping scientific knowledge-making. In doing so, it situates the interventions in this collection in relation to the ways in which animal historians have both engaged with and underestimated the importance of changes over time in scientific knowledge about animals and their environments; and how animals (as individuals and as cultural, social, and political collectives) have informed science, medicine, technology, and other domains of mainly human activity.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.004 | 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 it