Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The first part of the title to this commentary, or a variation thereof, is commonplace in most published articles these days.If one were to look back historically at when the phenomenon of "supplemental information" began, it appears that it was sporadically introduced around the turn of the century about a decade ago.At that time, only a few journals adopted the idea of including additional information with the online version of an article.Indeed, the inclusion of supplemental information with published articles seems to correlate with the increased dependence of accessing a journal online.But if one were to ask the questions: who started this phenomenon and are there uniform guidelines as to what and how much should be included in this online inclusion, the answers are not readily apparent.In fact, the answers may lie in the answer to the question: why do we have supplemental information to begin with?An informal survey of editors of some high-impact journals indicates that the impetus for supplemental information came from the editorial boards and not from submitting authors.That is, authors were not looking for a way to include more information but editors wanted to see this, or at least a redistribution of the material they perceived as relevant.Many journals, for financial considerations, restrict word or character counts on their articles.In an effort to allow authors to maximize the data they are presenting, many journals allow detailed experimental procedures to be included in a supplemental information file.One editor of a prominent journal suggested that much of the material in the supplemental information is the result of author rebuttals to reviewers' comments or questions.Since there is increased online access, and supplemental information is never found in print-form, this represents a means of increasing transparency by showing all readers (or those who choose to access the online version) the responses of the authors.In addition, in data-rich fields such as genomics and proteomics, including all of the raw data in the main body of an article is simply not possible and such data is often included in supplemental information.Finally, some authors include still-shots of live-cell imaging in the articles and, in the interests of both transparency and completeness, include the full movie in supplemental information.These are certainly justifiable uses of this online section of an article.However, over the past few years it seems that supplemental information has evolved other uses, particularly by authors and journal reviewers.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,071 | 0,054 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».