MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6940464682 · doi:10.7916/d8-m8sz-m884

Reminiscences of Donn Allan Pennebaker, 1981

2021· article· en· W6940464682 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueColumbia Academic Commons (Columbia University) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFilmmakingWhite (mutation)Performance artDocumentary filmPublic figure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Childhood: father's photographic career, parents' divorce; engineering studies; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Yale, 1947; founder, Electronics Engineering; early literary aspirations; filmmaking techniques and influence of Francis Thompson; marriage to and divorce from Sylvia Bell; documentary filmmaking with Drew Associates and Time-Life Films, 1959-1963: association with Julien Bryan, Robert Drew, Ricky Leacock, Albert Maysles, Greg Shuker; development of cinematic techniques, sound and camera equipment; philosophy of documentary filmmaking; selection of characters and subjects, editing, role and size of production crew; films discussed in detail: film loops for Brussels World's Fair, DAYBREAK (1953), GYPSY (1958), DAVID (1961), SUSAN STARR (1962), JANE (1962), SECOND CITY COMMERCIALS (1965), DONT LOOK BACK (1966), MAIDSTONE (1968), MONTERREY POP (1968), 1 PM (1969), KEEP ON ROCKIN' (1972); Pennebaker Associates filming in the White House during the Kennedy and Carter administrations; relationship of Public Broadcasting System and National Film Board of Canada to independent filmmakers; impressions of Gypsy Rose Lee, Chris Hegedus, John DeLorean, Hope Ryden, Jean-Luc Godard, Bob Dylan, Eddie Sachs, Norman Mailer

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.012

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.173 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueColumbia Academic Commons (Columbia University)Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207