Introduction altmetrics: What, why and where?
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- Metaresearch, Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Not applicableConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.728
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.999
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.100 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
Abstract Editor's Summary The ASIS&T Bulletin special section on altmetrics presents alternative metrics as a new and critically needed approach to measuring the impact of scholarly research. With long‐established citation‐based metrics unable to capture the increasing variety of online references to a scholar's work, alternative indicators offer a different view of the influence of that work. Contributed papers demonstrate how altmetrics can work on a personal level to enhance a scholar's CV and on a broad, even global level, to transform scholarly communication through its interaction with open access, digital repositories and research in emerging countries. One article suggests altmetrics should soon be included among mainstream metrics, and other contributions describe specific indicators and altmetric software considerations. The need for innovative measurement and the advantages of altmetrics in particular bode well for their wide acceptance and continuing development.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
- Topic
- scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Field
- Decision Sciences
- Canadian institutions
- ImpactOpenAlex
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- AltmetricsComputer scienceMainstreamData scienceCitationWorld Wide WebPolitical science
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes