MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022917124 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.080306

New process created to choose centres

2008· article· en· W2022917124 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wayne Kondro

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarthquake and Disaster Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrengths and weaknessesProcess (computing)Computer scienceMeasure (data warehouse)Data scienceData miningPsychologyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first 7 were chosen by apparent whim. The new 11 have been selected by a hybrid new process, in which a measure of academic peer review was utilized to identify strengths and weaknesses of proposals but a committee of industrialists weighed the relative merits of competing applications for a new

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)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0110.004
Scholarly communication0.0130.006
Open science0.0040.020
Research integrity0.0040.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1090.038

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicEarthquake and Disaster Impact StudiesFrench-language works237,207