Lurie, Robert: San Francisco Giants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bob Lurie: It started out when Chuck Feeney, who was my big buddy and was at that time president of the National League, said the Orange want to have a conference call and talk about the situation. So we had a conference call – I think it was on a Monday or so at noon. I had just come back from a trip through Minneapolis because a Short had fallen down and broken his hip and was in the hospital. We had the conference call at noon and I requested 48 hours to find a partner to try to buy the Giants. And in their great wisdom, they gave me five hours. Walter O’Malley was a great help in that he didn’t want to see the rivalry disappear by having the Giants going to Toronto. So he tried to get a longer period, but they said, “No, call us back in five hours.” Back then there were a lot of people, supposedly, interested in getting involved. As I tried to call some of those people, it turned out they were all out to lunch for more than five hours. So nobody was around until I guess Corey got a call from a man by the name of Bud Herseth -- probably around 3 o’clock that afternoon -- saying that he loved baseball, heard there was something going on in San Francisco and a problem. Bottom line to several phone calls in an hour or two was that he had some money, he wanted to put it up, he wanted to become a partner, and we verbally came to an agreement. At 5 o’clock that day, I called back and said I had a partner. Buzzy Vuvezy said, “Oh, I know about Herseth. He’s a good person; he’d fit in fine.”, so they gave us approval, and things went from there.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.201 | 0.058 |
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".