MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976443848 · doi:10.1080/00207594.2011.566018

South‐East European Regional Conference of Psychology, 2009, Sofia, Bulgaria

2011· article· en· W1976443848 on OpenAlexaff
Michael C. Knowles, Michel Sabourin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Psychology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresidencyInternational psychologyBulgarianPolitical scienceEuropean unionLibrary scienceSocial sciencePsychologySociologyLawAsian psychologyCritical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first South‐East European Regional Conference of Psychology was held in Sofia, Bulgaria, from 30 October to 1 November 2009, under the Patronage of the President of Bulgaria and the auspices of the International Association of Applied Psychology (IAAP), the International Union of Psychological Science (IUPsyS), and the International Association for Cross‐Cultural Psychology (IACCP), with further financial support provided by the European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations (EFPA) and the European Health Psychology Society (EHPS). The conference was hosted by the Bulgarian Psychological Society under the Conference Presidency of Dr Plamen Dimitrov, who was supported by Professor Sava Djonev as Chair of the Scientific Program Committee. It attracted over 350 participants from 25 countries, including 14 countries from the SEE region and its immediate neighbours. The Scientific Program explored ways and means to promote the role of psychology individually and institutionally at regional and international levels. Planning is already under way to organize a second regional conference in three years’ time.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.023

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 head0.257
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.185 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of PsychologySame topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207