MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086193178 · doi:10.1002/sres.451

Doing the right thing: the problems of…Gerard de Zeeuw, academic guerilla

2002· article· en· W2086193178 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ranulph Glanville

Bibliographic record

VenueSystems Research and Behavioral Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Influence and Diplomacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)SociologySet (abstract data type)Work (physics)Quality (philosophy)Law and economicsManagementEpistemologyHistoryPhilosophyComputer scienceEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A set of central themes, constituting both a method and an approach, demonstrated in the ‘Problems of…’ conference series over the last quarter century, are extracted from the work of Gerard de Zeeuw. These themes are based in a consideration of and concern for improvement, and an attempt to reduce the frequently negative side effects of attempts at improvement, by creating ‘high‐quality observations’ and empowering those helped by making them actors. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.031
Scholarly communication0.0120.013
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystems Research and Behavioral ScienceSame topicHistorical Influence and DiplomacyFrench-language works237,207