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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use experiments to analyze multiple dimensions of the relationship between rank incentives and individual performance. In our experiment (i) rank is defined as subjects' relative position in their group based on their performance in a real effort task and (ii) subjects' earnings are independent of their performance. We find that any rank incentive improves mean performance than no rank incentive, and this result is independent of the group size. In the large group, the mean performance increases strictly in all except at the highest rank incentive, but in the small group the mean performance increases weakly in rank incentives. Finally, the mean performance is significantly higher in the large than in the small group because of a higher “prestige effect.” In additional treatments in which we do not reveal the identity of the status‐prize winners, we find that average performance is identical to that in the baseline treatment without any status prizes. The last result signifies the important role that public revelation plays to enhance the strength of status. The results are important for managerial practices.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it