MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Robert Hooke: Tercentennial Studies

2015· article· en· W646190524 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael Hunter, Stephen Gaukroger

Bibliographic record

VenueAestimatio Sources and Studies in the History of Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHistory and Developments in Astronomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHooke's lawPhilosophyArtMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Book synopsis: Robert Hooke (1635-1703) was a genius whose wide-ranging achievements are at last receiving the recognition that they deserve. Long overshadowed by such eminent contemporaries as Sir Isaac Newton and Sir Christopher Wren, Hooke's own seminal contributions to science, architecture and technology are now being acclaimed in their own right. Curator of Experiments to the Royal Society when it was chartered in 1662 and author of the famous Micrographia (1665), Hooke also showed unparalleled ingenuity in designing machines and instruments, and played a crucial role as Surveyor to the City of London after the Great Fire. This volume represents a benchmark in the study of Hooke, bringing together a comprehensive set of studies of different aspects of his life, thought and artistry. Its sections deal with Hooke's life and reputation; his contributions to celestial mechanics and astronomy, and to speculative natural philosophy; the instruments that he designed; and his work in architecture and construction. The introduction places the studies in the context of our current understanding of Hooke and his milieu, while the book also contains a comprehensive bibliography. In all, it will be an invaluable resource for all those interested in a figure whose complexity and importance are becoming clear after centuries of neglect.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.019

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAestimatio Sources and Studies in the History of ScienceSame topicHistory and Developments in AstronomyFrench-language works237,207