MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004681724 · doi:10.1108/14666180010382563

Trends in publishing academic grey literature: examples from economics

2000· article· en· W2004681724 on OpenAlexaff
Fethy Mili

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal on Grey Literature · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingElectronic publishingWork (physics)Grey literatureLibrary scienceAcademic communityWorld Wide WebComputer sciencePolitical scienceEngineeringThe InternetLawMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What impact might electronic publishing have on grey literature? This work tries to give some answers based on changes in the publishing of economics research preprints or working‐paper series. Institutions and some members of the economics community have created archives to facilitate access to working paper series. In this document, we evaluate the prospects for electronic publishing of economics preprints using an inventory of material available from institutions’ web sites. Also the paper contains an overview of some working‐paper archives managed by economists.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0570.050
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0480.009
Open science0.0050.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.304
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.195 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
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

Citations11
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal on Grey LiteratureSame topicscientometrics and bibliometrics researchFrench-language works237,207