MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1904921918 · doi:10.33524/cjar.v16i2.211

“RESEARCH WITH” INSTEAD OF “RESEARCH ON”: ACTION RESEARCH WITH “VULNERABLE”PARTICIPANTS

2015· article· en· W1904921918 on OpenAlex
Trudie Aberdeen

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Action Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Science Research and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction researchPsychologyAction (physics)Participatory action researchMathematics educationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

And that this journal has survived this long is perhaps a testament to the tenacity of grassroots researchers in the face of rather inhospitable conditions (Clausen, 2007, p. 1).

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.

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)0.199
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1990.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0080.011
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.830
GPT teacher head0.641
Teacher spread0.189 · 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