MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048045874 · doi:10.1097/jfn.0000000000000064

What Authors Need to Know About Predatory Publishing

2015· editorial· en· W2048045874 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cindy Peternelj‐Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forensic Nursing · 2015
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutopsy Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForensic nursingPublishingLibrary scienceSociologyForensic scienceMedicinePolitical scienceLawComputer scienceVeterinary medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Author Affiliations: Journal of Forensic Nursing and College of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan. The author declares no conflict of interest. Correspondence: Cindy Peternelj-Taylor, MSc, BScN, RN, DF-IAFN, Professor, College of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Room 4214, E-Wing Health Sciences, 104 Clinic Place, Saskatoon, SK S7N 2Z4, Canada. E-mail: [email protected].

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)0.092
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.092
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0150.009
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0190.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.010

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
DomainEvaluation
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Forensic NursingSame topicAutopsy Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207