MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006242952 · doi:10.3138/jsp.44.3.007

Death of a Small Journal?

2013· article· en· W2006242952 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stephen K. Donovan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Scholarly Publishing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutionExtinction (optical mineralogy)CitationHistoryRecipeData scienceSociologyLibrary scienceComputer scienceSocial scienceBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What is the little journal to do in this era of impact factors, burgeoning lists of international publications available in both hard copy and online, and academic effort being increasingly focused on attaining the highest profile for an individual's home institution? It seems that viable models are get big, if you can, or stay small and serve a specialist/regional audience. The middle ground of a moderate profile journal that does not appear on the right citation indices appears to be a recipe for extinction.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.102
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.102
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0130.013
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.013

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 head0.638
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.120 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Scholarly PublishingSame topicscientometrics and bibliometrics researchFrench-language works237,207