MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6940475856 · doi:10.7479/64y2-m311/8

Industrielle Mikropaläontologie / Industrial Micropaleontology

2022· dataset· de· W6940475856 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMuseum für Naturkunde Berlin - Leibniz-Institut für Evolutions- und Biodiversitätsforschung · 2022
Typedataset
Languagede
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsMinnow Environmental (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicropaleontologyNatural (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In den 1920er Jahren revolutionierten die Wissenschaftlerinnen Esther Applin, Alva Ellisor und Hedwig Kniker die Mikropaläontologie. Sie arbeiteten für Ölfirmen. In diesem Rahmen gelang es ihnen, das enorme Potential mikropaläontologischer Analysen für die Stratigrafie und die Erdölgeologie nachzuweisen. Tiere als Objekte? ist eine Online-Publikation von Wissenschaftler:innen des Museums für Naturkunde Berlin, des Berliner Zoos und der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, herausgegeben von Ina Heumann und Tahani Nadim. Die Publikation ist Teil des vom BMBF-geförderten Forschungsprojekts "Tiere als Objekte. Zoologische Gärten und Naturkundemuseum in Berlin, 1810 bis 2020". In the 1920s, scientists Esther Applin, Alva Ellisor, and Hedwig Kniker revolutionised micropaleontology. They were employed by oil companies and discovered important applications for stratigraphy and petroleum geology. Animals as Objects? is an online publication by researchers from the Museum für Naturkunde Berlin, the Zoo Berlin, and the Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, edited by Ina Heumann and Tahani Nadim. It was funded by the BMBF as part of the research project "Animals as Objects. Zoological Gardens and Natural History Museum in Berlin, 1810 to 2020".

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)0.001
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.011

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMuseum für Naturkunde Berlin - Leibniz-Institut für Evolutions- und BiodiversitätsforschungSame topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207