MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091227949 · doi:10.5539/cis.v3n2p19

A Bibliometric Assessment of Canadian Software Engineering Scholars and Institutions (1996-2006)

2010· article· en· W2091227949 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of TorontoQueen's UniversityDalhousie UniversityYork UniversityUniversities Space Research AssociationSt Mary's UniversityConcordia UniversityAcadia UniversityMcMaster UniversityUniversity of WindsorUniversity of ReginaSimon Fraser UniversityMcGill UniversityUniversity of OttawaVictoria UniversityUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsRanking (information retrieval)Index (typography)Computer scienceInstitutionEvent (particle physics)Field (mathematics)Impact factorLibrary scienceSoftwareBibliometricsPolitical scienceWorld Wide WebInformation retrievalMathematicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper summarizes a ranking of Canadian researchers and institutions in the field of software engineering from 1996 to 2006, based on two metrics: impact factors, and h-index. The ranking is going to be an ongoing, annual event to identify the top 50 scholars and top 50 institutions over a 10-year period in Canada. The rankings are calculated based on the impact factor and h-index of papers published in top 12 selected software engineering journals and conferences. The top-ranked institution is Carleton University, and the top-ranked scholars (by each of the two metrics) are Lionel Briand (formerly with Carleton University) and Gail Murphy from UBC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.5530.643
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.010
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.250
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.234 · 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