MétaCan
ENFR
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.

Export CSVExport JSONAPI query

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
Year range
→
Sort
Language
Type
Field
Venue
Scientific Study of Literature
Topic
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.

21 results · 1 filter active ·
Results by year
20112021
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.
21 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 1 of 1

Labels cover 0 of 21 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 21 of 21 works in this cohort. Predictions are machine_predicted_unvalidated teacher distillation outputs. Candidate is the union; consensus is the intersection.

affunlabeled
Reading other minds
2013· article· en· Scientific Study of Literature· Arts and Humanities
distilled prediction:candidate · insufficient_payloadconsensus · none
181
citations
affunlabeled
Lost in an iPad
2014· article· en· Scientific Study of Literature· Social Sciences
distilled prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
138
citations
affunlabeled
The Experiencing Questionnaire
2012· article· en· Scientific Study of Literature· Neuroscience
distilled prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
47
citations
affunlabeled
The scientific study of literature
2011· article· en· Scientific Study of Literature· Computer Science
distilled prediction:candidate · sts+scholarly_communicationconsensus · none
46
citations
affunlabeled
Genre or artistic merit?
2012· article· en· Scientific Study of Literature· Psychology
distilled prediction:candidate · insufficient_payloadconsensus · none
42
citations
afffundunlabeled
Toward a science of science fiction
2014· article· en· Scientific Study of Literature· Computer Science
distilled prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
28
citations
affunlabeled
Measuring literary experience
2015· article· en· Scientific Study of Literature· Arts and Humanities
distilled prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
16
citations
affunlabeled
Judging a book by its cover
2015· article· en· Scientific Study of Literature· Social Sciences
distilled prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
13
citations
affunlabeled
The future of an allusion
2011· article· en· Scientific Study of Literature· Social Sciences
distilled prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
3
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
Approaching text genre
2020· article· en· Scientific Study of Literature· Arts and Humanities
distilled prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
1
citations
affunlabeled
Approaching text genre
2020· article· en· Scientific Study of Literature· Psychology
distilled prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
1
citations

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About