MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1543868045 · doi:10.18723/diw_ddc:2006-13

Enhancing the Power of Household Panel Studies: The Case of the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) ; Paper Prepared for the StatCan-Conference "Longitudinal Social Surveys in an International Perspective", McGill University, Montreal, 25-27 Jan 2006

2006· article· en· W1543868045 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gert G. Wagner, Joachim R. Frick, Jürgen Schupp

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanPerspective (graphical)Panel dataPower (physics)EconomicsPolitical scienceDemographic economicsSociologyEconometricsGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

continuing development would not be possible.We are particularly grateful to the principal investigators, staff and supporters of SOEP in its early years, especially Hans-

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.470
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.724
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4700.724
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0040.014
Scholarly communication0.0090.022
Open science0.0050.013
Research integrity0.0090.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207