MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1561925188

Creeping Online: Canadian Feminist Scholarly Journals

2011· article· en· W1561925188 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katherine Side

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of international women's studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipScholarly communicationPublishingContext (archaeology)SociologyFeminismPolitical sciencePublic relationsMedia studiesGender studiesLawHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

World-wide, there are over 4,000 peer-reviewed, scholarly, open access journals (Geist 2009). Theoretically, they are available to all of those with internet access. In Women’s and/ Gender Studies, open access journals publish research findings, discussion and debate and often, creative submissions. In other disciplines, such as the natural sciences, they are also locations to share large data sets and provide access to preliminary research findings. The Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities calls for the extension of accessibility with the explicit intention of knowledge distribution and knowledge sharing (2003). This article explores the status of online feminist scholarly journals, given this context.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of international women's studiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207