Newsletters - Potters Guild of British Columbia 2006 Aug/Sept 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the Lattice Structures event held in Kansas City last fall, a few of the presenters decided that it would be great to get this group of crystalline potters back together again soon.Almost immediately, they began organizing a more intimate working session at Kris Friedrich's state-of-the-art studio in Palm Desert for early May.The notion was to keep the group smaller, and bring Peter Ilsley back from England for another visit to lead a glazing workshop.Kris asked Peter to describe his dream workshop.Peter replied: "I said it would be five days with no more than twenty competent crystalline potters and lots of firing availability plus a kiln for post-firing reduction."As it turned out, Kris granted those wishes and a great deal more.As the planning continued, the event evolved from workshop into Share-Fest with so many of the Lattice Structures presenters and leading crystalline potters signed on to attend.Spending five days glazing and firing alongside
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.406 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".