MétaCan
Menu
Cohort builder

4,299,418 works, Canadian by any of four routes.

Every filter state is a URL; the URL is the query; the query is citable via /q/⟨hash⟩. The page, the API and the export parse the same parameters.

The current cohort, streamed from the database: every work column, the machine labels, the provisional scores, and the per-row validation status. Exports are capped at 100,000 rows. Mints a permanent /q/ link for this exact query. The same filters always produce the same link, whoever asks.

Search term
Author
Year range
Sort
Language
Type
Field
Venue
Topic
Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Retraction
Abstract
Evidence source
Study design
Label agreement
Label status

Direct Codex and Gemma labels are unvalidated and sparse. Distilled predictions cover the full frame and are also unvalidated. Choose the evidence source explicitly; absence of a direct label is never a negative label.

affaffiliation
fundfunder
venuejournal
aboutaboutness

The four routes compose: require the funder route and exclude affiliation to get the funder-only stratum no affiliation-based frame ever sees.

1,524 results · 1 filter active ·
Results by year
20002025
Publication date
Categories
Machine labels · sparse coverage
Evidence
Language
Type
Citations
An unlabeled work is unknown, not a negative. Label coverage is reported on every query.
1,524 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 2 of 31

Labels cover 1 of 1,524 works in this cohort. The rest are unlabeled, which is not a negative label: the label table is sparse today and grows as labeling rounds land.

Distilled predictions cover 1,524 of 1,524 works in this cohort. Predictions are machine_predicted_unvalidated. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work (title-only); the Codex side is a distilled, calibrated classifier. Candidate is the union; consensus is the intersection.

affunlabeled
Echolocation in humans: an overview
Lore Thaler, Melvyn A. Goodale
2016· review· en· Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Cognitive Science· Neuroscience
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
129
citations
affunlabeled
Playing with the sound maker
Alissa N. Antle, Milena Droumeva, Greg Corness
2008· article· en· Neuroscience
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
120
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
The Role of Cutaneous Receptors in the Foot
J. Timothy Inglis, Paul Kennedy, Cari Wells, Romeo Chua
2002· article· en· Advances in experimental medicine and biology· Neuroscience
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
116
citations
affunlabeled
Timbremap
Jing Su, Alyssa Rosenzweig, Ashvin Goel, Eyal de Lara, Khai N. Truong
2010· article· en· Neuroscience
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
105
citations
affunlabeled
Haptic phonemes
Mario Enriquez, Karon E. MacLean, Christian Chita
2006· article· en· Neuroscience
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
103
citations
afffundunlabeled
Vibrotactile discrimination of musical timbre.
Frank Russo, Paolo Ammirante, Deborah I. Fels
2012· article· en· Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance· Neuroscience
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
101
citations
affunlabeled
Zliding
Gonzalo Ramos, Ravin Balakrishnan
2005· article· en· Neuroscience
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
98
citations
affunlabeled
On Your Feet!
Ernst Kruijff, Alexander Marquardt, Christina Trepkowski, Robert W. Lindeman, André Hinkenjann, Jens Maiero +1 more
2016· article· en· Neuroscience
machine prediction:candidate · insufficient_payloadconsensus · none
96
citations

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About