MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design and Development of a Process for Web-based Survey Research

2000· article· en· W160623409 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mike Carbonaro, Joyce Bainbridge

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Journal of Educational Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFocus Groups and Qualitative Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeb surveySurvey researchProcess (computing)Educational researchPsychologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebMathematics educationApplied psychologyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A number of recent scholarly articles have examined the role of Internet-based technology in areas such as making education more accessible, promoting learning, containing cost, and improving research (Ferterman

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)0.200
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.212
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2000.212
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0120.009
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.008

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 head0.585
GPT teacher head0.618
Teacher spread0.033 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations28
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicFocus Groups and Qualitative MethodsFrench-language works237,207