Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Year of TransitionWith this issue, Olifant marks its fifth anniversary.It was in October 1973 that a fifty-two page typewritten publication was distributed to the members of the Société Rencesvals, American-Canadian Branch, and since that date Olifant has seen a continual growth, both in the number of its readers and the number of pages printed in each volume.The last issue, 132 pages long, was distributed to readers throughout the world, in six continents and on both sides of the iron curtain.The past year alone saw a fifty percent increase in the number of our subscribers, this at a time when so many other excellent journals have had to face decreasing circulations, leading to smaller numbers of pages being printed per volume.We are more than pleased with the success of our venture and would like to take this opportunity to thank you, our readers, for the support you have given us in the past.As we face our next half decade, we hope you will continue not only to enjoy reading these pages but that you will also continue to contribute articles, reviews, announcements, and ideas for improvement.This is your journal.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.160 | 0.080 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".