MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059295110 · doi:10.1087/20110208

Casting a wide net: the Journal Impact Factor numerator

2011· article· en· W2059295110 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen C. HUBBARD, Marie McVeigh

Bibliographic record

VenueLearned Publishing · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsThomson Reuters (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpact factorComputer scienceCitationSearch engine indexingOrder (exchange)Information retrievalFactor (programming language)Library scienceOperations researchData scienceMathematicsPolitical scienceEconomicsLawProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT All metrics published in the Journal Citation Reports™ are dependent on the complete and correct aggregation of citations to each journal title. Here, we explain how unique cited titles are created for Thomson Reuters indexing, and how variations and ambiguities in titles are collected in order to create the Journal Impact Factor numerator.

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)0.101
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.101
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0120.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.012
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.780
GPT teacher head0.563
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLearned PublishingSame topicscientometrics and bibliometrics researchFrench-language works237,207