MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005567013

Review of <i>George Miksch Sutton: Artist, Scientist, and Teacher</i>. By Jerome A. Jackson.

2008· article· en· W7005567013 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInsecta mundi · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHemiptera Insect Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorge (robot)BiographyIntrospectionAdventureRegretWonderWorld War II
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sutton, an introspective and very private man, sadly destroyed many of his personal papers before he died. His Bird Student: An Autobiography (1980) documents his life only through 1935 and the end of his Cornell days. Jackson's book is especially valuable, therefore, in documenting Sutton's later years, after he had reached his prime both as scholar and artist. Although I thought I personally knew Sutton very well and wrote a small book based on a collection of his paintings of baby birds, I learned much from Jackson's narrative, which details Sutton's World War II experiences, his often frustrating years at the University of Michigan, and finally his move in 1952 to the University of Oklahoma, where his name soon became synonymous with Oklahoma ornithology. From there Sutton made repeated field trips to Mexico and the Canadian Arctic, generating eight books and more than 150 short publications, as well as producing some of his best paintings.\nIn addition to his richly documented text, Jackson provides a detailed account of Sutton's writings, a list of the books and monographs he illustrated, and the names of his graduate students and research topics. Persons who knew George Sutton will read this book with special interest and great pleasure, for it illuminates the life of this remarkable man as no other single source could do. Those who read it without having met Sutton will doubtless regret never knowing one of the giants of American ornithology.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsecta mundiSame topicHemiptera Insect StudiesFrench-language works237,207