MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097239383

THE IDENTIFICATION AND INTERPRETATION OF MICROBIAL BIOGEOMAGNETISM

2007· article· en· W7097239383 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeotourism and Geoheritage Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecambrianInterpretation (philosophy)Class (philosophy)ChinaIdentification (biology)Staring
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The efforts of many people, both inside and outside of Caltech, have allowed me to complete this dissertation. My advisor, Joe Kirschvink, played a particularly critical role. Over the last five years, he has been extraordinarily generous with his time, thoughts, and resources. Nearly as soon as I arrived in Pasadena in July 2002, I left to spend a month with Joe traveling through the Paleoproterozoic in South Africa and Canada. He has since taken me to explore the early Precambrian in Western Australia and the late Precambrian in South Australia and sent me to China to investigate the record of the Permo-Triassic extinction there. Such global travels have not only helped me understand many of the great geological questions of geobiology; by exposing me to different nations and different economic situations, they have played a major role in shaping my motivations for my future work. Joe has also been exemplary in the classroom in exciting students about the Earth sciences and has provided me with abundant opportunities to develop my own teaching skills. My favorite student evaluation from an Earth history class I helped Joe teach in 2006 reads, “Kopp and Kirschvink are a fascinating pair. The class is almost worth taking just to hear them banter. ” Joe is trusting, open, and in many ways selfless with respect to his students,

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeotourism and Geoheritage ConservationFrench-language works237,207