MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031263050 · doi:10.4033/iee.2011.4.9.e

Money for nothing and your referees for free

2011· article· en· W2031263050 on OpenAlex
Christopher J. Lortie

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueIdeas in Ecology and Evolution · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmaceutical industry and healthcare
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivilege (computing)NothingPerceptionPeriod (music)IdentifierComputer scienceEpistemologyComputer securityPhilosophyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Academics pursue knowledge and truth. It is a real privilege to be paid, at least part of the time, to think, write, conduct research, and solve problems (and teach—which may or not be included in the perception of privilege, depending on the person). An easy identifier of our labor is publications. We assume that what sets these publications apart from other written endeavors is that they are published in journals and are peer-reviewed. Other formats, such as various period-icals, are also very similar to journals, but it is my understanding that these articles—for the most part—are formally reviewed only by editors and not by peers. The contribution of peers is therefore

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.510
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.017 · 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