MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037312876 · doi:10.1126/science.1174523

Debating Reality and Relevance <b> Revisiting Race in a Genomic Age <i>Barbara A. Koenig, Sandra Soo-Jin Lee, and Sarah S. Richardson, Eds.</i> </b> Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ, 2008. 394 pp. $80. ISBN 9780813543231. Paper, $32.95. ISBN 9780813543246. Studies in Medical Anthropology.

2009· article· en· W2037312876 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Troy Duster

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRace, Genetics, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRace (biology)Relevance (law)SociologyEnvironmental ethicsArt historyGerontologyPhilosophyHistoryGender studiesPolitical scienceLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anthropologists, historians, geneticists, philosophers, and bioethicists explore what recent and current research on human genetics implies about the concepts of race and racial difference.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.020
Scholarly communication0.0080.020
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicRace, Genetics, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207