MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111879313 · doi:10.1177/0165551504042805

Variations in Use of Meta Tag Keywords by Web Pages in Different Languages

2004· article· en· W2111879313 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb visibility and informetrics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndonesianRanking (information retrieval)GermanComputer scienceTurkishWeb pageCharacter (mathematics)ASCIIInformation retrievalFontWorld Wide WebLinguisticsLibrary scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sets of top-ranking pages in 19 languages returned by the Google search engine were downloaded and their titles and meta tagged keywords analyzed. Results showed significant differences in proportion of pages with keywords depending on language; specifically, pages in Dutch, French, and German showed the highest proportions with keywords, while pages in Chinese and Korean showed the lowest proportions. Keywords were mostly in the languages of the pages, though on Chinese, Greek, Indonesian, and Turkish pages keywords in English or in English mixed with other languages predominated. The proportion of very long titles also varied significantly with language, with nearly 10% of titles on Russian pages exceeding 100 bytes, in contrast to less than 1% on Chinese, Finnish, Indonesian, and Polish pages. Both standard ASCII extensions and character entity references were used to code special characters in titles.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.016
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.247 · 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